The 25 Rules of Disinformation

Break the chains

Disinformation is carried out in different ways. Here are some examples:

A potentially dangerous news story may be ignored by mass media. Most people believe that something which has not been reported just does not exist.

A news story may be presented as a "wild accusation", especially by someone authoritative. People that have a large consensus or cover important positions in politics, economics or the military may leverage their reputation to label a a fact as false and preposterous.

A big media coverage of an important event may create enough distraction to deviate the attention of people from a real issue.

A rumor that is neither confirmed or denied may generate confusion and doubts in a large audience.

An individual or group of people may be forced or payed to provide false information that generate fake news stories.

Now that I have presented you some examples of how disinformation works, let me share with you some practical advice to protect yourself against misleading information:

Ask: Always ask yourself lots of questions when you hear a news story. Where is the news from? Is it a reliable source? Is somebody else reporting the same story? Question everything and take nothing for granted.

Verify: Search on the web or discuss with your friends and family any piece of news that comes from media sources. You may discover valuable information that put the entire story under a different light.

Keep position: Never underestimate your opinions and do not be afraid of authority. Beware "the guy who knows" who puts his credentials on the table. Everyone has the same level of reliability until they prove to be trustworthy.

Investigate: Be very careful with news stories claimed to be too complex to solve. No analysis of the story has probably been done and you are consuming information which has not been investigated or verified.

Focus: Do not try to split your attention to multiple news stories. Choose one and stick with it. Then move on. There is always a bigger news story screaming for attention that may distract your investigation.

These above are just some examples to help you think differently and develop a critical attitude towards everyday news you consume.

From Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney. These 25 rules are everywhere in media, from political debates, to television shows, to comments on a blog.

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 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” 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 so 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 “minutiae” 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 with denial 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. 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 them 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. 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 with an apparent deductive logic in a way that 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 for items 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. Vanishing 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 may require 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 an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (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) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

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 proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

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.

I agree with all of this and feel these methods are used on us and have been for years, all mainstream TV and media channels and newspapers are full of BS, followed closely by Hollywood movies. I feel more and more people are waking up and prefer watching/listening to alternative media sites. Once you connect the dots the rest becomes so see-through.

I also feel that our generation I hope will be the one who shouts ‘enough is enough’ and will switch away from what we are led to believe is the truth. I however feel our generation will not be the one who no longer support war for the gains of the so-called elite due to lack of knowledge and the leftist education system we all go though, and acts of false or real terrorism will not fail to convince the majority of us to live in fear, although big brother has done a good job so far! I have educated myself so much since becoming awake, I can understand now why the FSTE (100 of the most powerful top companies) the first 5 top profit making companies are weapons dealers? I also understand fractional reserve banking, where money is created as IOU’s and the Fed and the Bank of England are private companies owned by private families of which we never hear about in the mainstream news.

All most everything I have been taught in school/college is one big lie, both first and second world wars were funded by both sides for profit to lift us out of depression among other reason, to keep the giant ponzi scheme of paper money alive. War I think will never be the answer, but it sometimes is necessary but sadly many young people are signing their lives away for private companies and dying in the name of profit – Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Other than in our own western nations.

Why did building 7 collapse? Who do we owe Trillions of debt too? Why are we invading other countries? Who and why are we being watched over by CCTV? The voting system is rigged – why are our liberties and freedoms being stolen by? We must not fight but take small steps to remove the power of fear which has been put upon us, turn off the television, stop reading newspapers, step away from advertising, learn skills of self survival, read book, (this may sound odd but start with Mein Kampf the Ford translation if you are an English speaker, the book is not at all what you have been told it is) and The Kingdom of God is Within You, by Leo Tolstoy,  which can also be applied to any type of political ideology, education starts with one’s own mind, love is more powerful than hate in the long run but at times may not appear so.