in Other Voices , 252 references
Ah, the fish are biting today.... but who are they biting? The man in the back of the boat? Maybe...... more from Ishmael..... -- Ed
Today’s guest Ticker is another postmortem on the Coof Wars. Technically, since people are still dying suddenly, we’re in the bonus round. Some decisions echo through decades, lockdowns and Operation Warp speed are two of them.
Studying the past is a tool to predict how the next battle will be fought. I make no predictions on what it will be. It could be another riot season that turns into urban warfare, RussiaRussiaRussia, or even aliens. At this point, I almost welcome our outer space overlords.
Clown world attempts to supplant reality by first changing people’s thoughts. Our minds are potent weapons so they must be neutralized. One tactic is disinformation.
As I went down more and more rabbit holes gathering information for the Guard Your Mind series, one thing became very clear: the way they shoveled bullshit at us is nothing new. Lies have been with us since the beginning of time, they are just getting more sophisticated and coordinated parallel to technology.
H. Michael Sweeney wrote the seven traits of disinformation practitioners in 1997, and updated it in 2000. They describe the characteristics of an attack on truth and provide a good analysis framework. When these characteristics appear centered around an event, we may have found the next battlefront.
The sooner we catch on, the sooner we mount a counterattack and win. Or at least provide a suitable speedbump to protect our children and grandchildren. Knowledge is power.
Sweeney wrote his guidelines after observing behavior on Internet newsgroups. Today, the equivalent is the comments section or Reddit. However, I am going to expand his use by applying seven out of eight traits to the gaslighting campaign we’ve endured for three years, two months, and counting.
During the Coof Wars, sometimes we observed individual people act: Fraudchi, Walensky, a string of press secretaries. The characteristics also apply to organizations like the CDC, WHO, mainstream media, and social media.
Factual information was actively attacked and suppressed. Things that later proved to be true were viciously attacked initially. The list of targets was remarkably consistent across the world, platforms, and the news. The pure tin was mostly left alone. We saw this repeated pattern as they cherry picked faulty studies and ignored those that supported the truth.
This is an example of selectivity.
Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully…focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues…
Another characteristic is avoidance. It’s worth noting throughout the gaslighting we’ve endured, the enemy’s arguments have almost no actual substance beyond discrediting studies that don’t fit the official narrative. Their arguments all boil down to, “We’re right because trust Teh Science and you’re wrong.''
Avoidance. 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…
I do take exception to someone providing credentials as support for their position. After the past three years, it takes more than a medical degree to convince me you know anything about human health.
A third common characteristic is the enemy statements were anti-conspiratorial.
Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists'...
I prefer the term “coming attractions.”
Today’s example is a paper published on the National Institutes of Health website. Remember them? They likely funded the original research that gave us two years of lockdowns, vacation in place, and an increased death rate. Characteristics of Misinformation Spreading on Social Media During the COVID-19 Outbreak in China: A Descriptive Analysis was published May 10, 2021.
The people who wrote it are so arrogant they didn’t care they provided both an explanation of what they did, and a roadmap for future propaganda attacks.
Their plan is best summed up with this little gem from the end (emphasis added):
Chen, et al wrote..
If credible experts were to use these social media platforms, the effective delivery of high-quality information and the correction of misinformation before and during health-related crises could be achieved, as well as a further reduction in the amount of misinformation circulating on social media.
They mention pushing information out in advance of a crisis in a throwaway comment. Maybe some of those theories of a plandemic weren't so crazy.
Speaking of plans (emphasis added)…
Chen, et al wrote..
"Thus, one of the ways to eliminate hotbeds of misinformation is to offer continuously targeted and accurate information in advance based on predictions of the prospective COVID-19 outbreak situation.
So much for “trusting the science.” Since when is science settled in advance and reported to the public as fact instead of speculation? Oh wait, we live in clown world.
It’s just as well the definition of science changed, we are too stupid to think for ourselves.
Chen, et al wrote..
In the context of the universal audience, vague and abstract messages are a prerequisite…providing specific instructions predicated on the elite’s perspective of what all rational people would accept as fact is not effective. A shift to the approach enabling each particular audience to participate in the process of establishing interacting arguments is more productive...
Naturally the paper's recommendations include censorship online and manipulation.
Chen, et alI wrote..
If traditional beliefs are difficult to “overturn”, a better strategy is to “permeate.” First, health experts can use a gradual method to change a specific group’s health behaviors…Changing a specific group’s health behavior first will guide the public to understand a scientific health perception, which can be regarded as a premise for changing everyone’s health behavior…strictly penalize social media when they create or disseminate misinformation maliciously.
What were some targeted statements this paper called fiction that later evidence supported?
*The unknown pneumonia in Wuhan is the SARS virus.
*Lopinavir/ritonavir can effectively remedy COVID-19. (Note: Paxilovid contains ritonavir. According to the official narrative, it is a safeandeffective treatment. Call this one a clown world true.)
*COVID-19 is an evolution of the SARS virus.
*The coronavirus is synthetic.
*The coronavirus originated from the United States. (Note: There’s evidence Duke University was involved, some support this one is true.)
The recommended punishment for repeating any of the statements on social media was suppression and banhammer. Even though this was a Chinese paper, America followed the same playbook. Remember when China was a terrible place for human rights violations, not a country to emulate?
For a more complete list of wrongthink, check out Facebook’s Covid 19 policy.
As soon as social media is invoked, we should look for another Sweeney trait.
Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams…there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved…
Social media platforms all targeted the same statements in the same way. The lamestream media hopped right in line, too. To emphasize, many of these “dangerous misinformation” later proved accurate.
Remember the first fear campaign? Maaaaasssssssssskkkks.
Originally they didn’t help at all, because the US had none stockpiled. Then they were the only hope for human survival, but we still had none. Therefore, all peasants had to risk their lives by breathing freely in order to save nurses dancing in empty hospital wings. Finally they expected us to wear tard rags everywhere.
This is an example of inconsistency.
Inconsistent. 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'...
The science didn’t change. Neil Orr studied masks in the 1980s. They don’t do anything except make you look like a moron.
The inconsistent way the message on masks was presented was part of the gas lighting campaign. Terrify everyone with imminent death, create the illusion of scarcity, require a rare item for safety, and you produce a gullible public who can’t virtue signal fast enough. The same scarcity tactic was used with clot shots.
Remember this the next time you’re told that if you don’t Do Something, you're going to die. This applies to Russia and raising the debt ceiling.
Looking at cold and flu season rationally, there is no reason to be terrified. It happens every year. Yet in early 2020, coincidentally the CDC and WHO started freaking out. Hmmm.
Coincidental. 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.
When an ordinary event (flu season) is suddenly worthy of a press conference, social media thought policing, and a fear campaign, look for the why instead of what they say. If the why makes no sense in context of what they are saying, you hear disinformation.
Sweeney’s final trait is almost a gimme in political arenas. A lot of these people are pure evil, possibly psychopathic. How many times did you notice how fake one of the talking heads sounded? Or that beneath the façade of normalcy they were getting off on a power trip?
Artificial Emotions. 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…
Noting these disinformationalist features is another tool for guarding your mind. It is your most valuable asset, stay safe out there folks! We need mental sharpness for the next battle, which is coming sooner than any of us want.