Trying to get through the excellent book, Disinformation by Natalie Grant, one comes across so many points of profound interest that directly relate to events today, its really difficult to make it through a single page without stopping in amazement and going for a walk to assimilate what one has read.
This single paragraph from page 13 of Chapter 1 was interesting enough to make a post. Start at the word, “Absurd” for clarity outside of any specific context:
The exercise is to think on the people allegedly on the side of the freedom minded on the vaccines in this context. Think about the people who have planted the most absurd stories or done repeated interviews with people who delivered 90% truth, but 10% hysteria with impossible or absurd claims about them. Like the injections build home networks in your blood, or you can get a bluetooth signal from the graves of injected people. (I haven’t checked this one personally yet, but bluetooth generally is too weak to penetrate a coffin and 6 feet of earth and what the power supply be?) There are many more. And they make it easy to check and discredit for those who bother to do so.
While for those of us committed to not injecting ourselves with these shots, it doesn’t make much difference. But for those vast majority who will (or did at this point) this is a very powerful technique at causing them to dismiss our arguments. I’m certain we nearly all know a friend or family member who, when the discussion on the vaxx came up, they sarcastically repeated some absurd claim, thereby negating the material you may have had that was factually correct and even perhaps from Pfizer or the CDC’s own files.
At this point one may think its merely commercial. That its people who are looking for clicks and money that are grabbing the most sensational nonsense they can for selfish reasons. Then it boils down to the motive makes no difference just like the man shooting at you because he hates you, hates what group he thinks you belong to, or just wants to randomly shoot people affects how you respond. It doesn’t. That is for the courts way way after the fact. Motive isn’t important in disinformation efforts. Only stopping it one way or another. Understanding what is is, is probably the most effective way. Swindler or enemy agent, the effect is the same even if there is a subtle variation in desired effect.
So keep this thought in the back of your mind and run the program, ‘what am I listening to here’ as you watch materials intended for our consumption. See if any names stick out in the gumbo of people who are running shows and videos, even as the issue of the vaxx and Covid is petering out.
The root issue is one of balance. You cannot achieve balance if you constantly change the meaning of key words in language, like violence, for example. You cannot maintain balance if commonly accepted ideas, like the definition of 2 + 2 = 4 is decried as being racist, or CO2 is redefined as pollution. Law is rewritten overnight to suit an agenda or a minority.
If there are no absolutes, then everything is relative and nothing is constant. You cannot maintain balance without some measure of absolute knowledge. Dividing for the sake of conquest is a risky strategy, ultimately costs human lives and its proponents do not care if there is collateral damage.
JUSTIN TRUDEAU & the Liberal Party’s platform for 2023: Jab will be required for inter-provincial transport and much more.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fvh2GHQaIAIgQdQ?format=png&name=small
https://t.co/5RjQVJO29A
Just so he can say “I told you so, so don’t complain…” should he steal the next election.
Disgusting.
“Motive isn’t important in disinformation efforts.”
Yes, in single cases it is less important indeed — but in a full-blown information warfare with multiple LoEs it is important because the motive determines the enemy goals and methods, and thus defines the perpetrators themselves.
It is a whole different pattern, process, initiator, outcome and antidote — depending on the motive: Fraudsters, political warfare, 5GW, useful idiots or deceived simpletons work entirely differently and can be fought by different weapons and skills.
So stopping disinfo attacks requires different approaches depending on the motive in order to predict enemy behavior.
It also depends on the level of engagement of the receiver of a piece of disinfo: for a single “end-point” (receiver) it may be enough to counter the fraud itself. But with greater engamement it may be necessary to develop your own modus operandi — like how to target the target group of the enemy (your fellow citizens mostly) so that you can counter the enemy operation.
Thank you. Food for thought.
DISINFO: The stories about blood clots, I believe.
But, the photos presumably from embalmers of long clots in vials, I don’t know… Why? Because they are more or less the exact same photos found of intestinal parasites in a vial, thus no relation with Covid.
The question mark remains. Thankfully, the stories were short-lived.