How Covert Agents Infiltrate The Internet To Manipulate, Deceive, And Destroy Reputations, Glenn Greenwald - firstlook.org Options

[rob balsamo]

Many of us here are already well aware of such tactics, and many of us have "debated" such types.... but for those who may not be aware...

How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations
By Glenn Greenwald 24 Feb 2014, 6:25 PM EST

One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.

Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about “dirty trick” tactics used by GCHQ’s previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking “Five Eyes” alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”

By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.

Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.

Full Article - https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/...g-manipulation/

Related Topics -
Us Military Caught Manipulating Social Media, Running Mass Propaganda Accounts
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22384

Revealed: Air Force Ordered Software To Manage Army Of Fake Virtual People
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21115

Military Report: Secretly 'recruit Or Hire Bloggers'
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=11687

25 Tactics Of Truth Suppression
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21015

[tumetuestumefais...]

Interesting is that only last month I was already twice accused here (+ also elsewhere) directly and indirectly by, supposedly two different "rookie" users here of exacly this - "attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse" or being some kind of agent - all for me speaking up factual arguments against the NPTs, challenging credibility of their arguments.
Could it be that one of the tactic is also to accuse opponents of being some kind of infiltrators - to distract from the facts presented and avoid answering legitimate questions?

[woody]

Could it be that one of the tactic is also to accuse opponents of being some kind of infiltrators - to distract from the facts presented and avoid answering legitimate questions?

Of course - the distractors and infiltrators like to accuse others of distraction and infiltration...this is what makes things so confusing for newbies.

To find out who's honest und who not they have to go deep into the stuff, and this takes time and concentration. Not everyone is ready for that.

We still have a long way to go.

[tumetuestumefais...]

Of course - the distractors and infiltrators like to accuse others of distraction and infiltration...this is what makes things so confusing for newbies.
To find out who's honest und who not they have to go deep into the stuff, and this takes time and concentration. Not everyone is ready for that.
We still have a long way to go.

for me after the years if someone starts to talk ad-hominem B.S. without addressing factual argument is always immediately a big red flag. I wonder they still didn't get it that this tactics disqualifies them. But you're likely right that for newbies it can be pretty confusing. In the past I have contributed to Czech-Slovak 911 forum administered by my friend from Slovakia, but suddenly after years the site was absolutely destructed just by couple of provocateurs (possibly one or two using more nicknames) in just couple of months, the admin initially wasn't reacting to serious warnings and moderating the site being too liberal. But really just in month or two the site was absolutely infested with tons of B.S. everywhere, serious readers and contributors couldn't often even find their posts - so much of B.S. was suddenly posted there. And then it was too late, the site died out, because nobody serious enjoyed anymore to visit it, not speaking contribute there, because everybody posting real stuff was immediately attacked by this claque of false identities, produced most likely just by one or two provocateurs, often exactly using direct or indirect accusations against others of being agents infiltrators and like. It was especially absurd to read it from entintities registered couple of hours earlier. Also serious people gradually no more wanted to have anything with the site, because it was seriously compromised and loosing all authority. Then already didn't help even to serially ban this entities, because they immediately registered under new names and continued posting and posting and posting into the chaos of absolute OT, a stuff that David Icke is a conservative scientist in comparison with that...
I'm in principle against abortions, but the evil must be nipped in the bud...

[woody]

for me after the years if someone starts to talk ad-hominem B.S. without addressing factual argument is always immediately a big red flag. I wonder they still didn't get it that this tactics disqualifies them. But you're likely right that for newbies it can be pretty confusing. In the past I have contributed to Czech-Slovak 911 forum administered by my friend from Slovakia, but suddenly after years the site was absolutely destructed just by couple of provocateurs (possibly one or two using more nicknames) in just couple of months, the admin initially wasn't reacting to serious warnings and moderating the site being too liberal. But really just in month or two the site was absolutely infested with tons of B.S. everywhere, serious readers and contributors couldn't often even find their posts - so much of B.S. was suddenly posted there. And then it was too late, the site died out, because nobody serious enjoyed anymore to visit it, not speaking contribute there, because everybody posting real stuff was immediately attacked by this claque of false identities, produced most likely just by one or two provocateurs, often exactly using direct or indirect accusations against others of being agents infiltrators and like. It was especially absurd to read it from entintities registered couple of hours earlier. Also serious people gradually no more wanted to have anything with the site, because it was seriously compromised and loosing all authority. Then already didn't help even to serially ban this entities, because they immediately registered under new names and continued posting and posting and posting into the chaos of absolute OT, a stuff that David Icke is a conservative scientist in comparison with that...
I'm in principle against abortions, but the evil must be nipped in the bud...

Amen. I have also three or four stories like that. Damaging the credibiity of an entire site by posting nonsense. Difficult to cope with. But I've learned my lesson over the time...

[poppyburner]

How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations
By Glenn Greenwald...

That's rich, coming from Michael Moore's unapologetic, Guardian pal:

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/288676506513846272

[WhisperingWnd]

Many of us here are already well aware of such tactics, and many of us have "debated" such types.... but for those who may not be aware...

How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations
By Glenn Greenwald 24 Feb 2014, 6:25 PM EST

One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It's time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.

Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about "dirty trick" tactics used by GCHQ's previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking "Five Eyes" alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled "The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations."

thanks for posting this rob.

once a person is targeted and methods are put in progress to destroy someone's credibility and reputation online, it could/would affect life situations offline as well. it becomes very damaging and might never be rectified.
unfortunately this is not well known or people just don't realize these forces are at play sometimes. it's pretty easy to accomplish when the "crowd" takes the bait thereby making for a successful outcome.

[paulmichael]

Let's not jump to conclusions that all shills are agents of the government.

Shills may be working for American Airlines, United Airlines, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, insurance companies that shelled out billions in the absence of a by-the-book investigation of 9/11, Silverstein Properties, or possibly other entities.

Also, what you may think are two or three shills may be one and the same person who fits the profile of a psycho-spy type with multiple personalities and multiple writing styles to go alone with those personalities.

P.M.

[amazed!]

A good point PM, and also Mossad and Israeli interests.

[beijingyank]

The most insidious thing I have come up against is censorship through banning.
The war criminal lick boots can't win an open debate and they know it.
So, the best recourse to them is to ban the author and comment.
Now, as veterans who swore "protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign, and domestic" this kind of censorship is treason.
A Patriot might not agree with what someone says, but will defend to the death his right to say it. Because at the end of the day, if you ban comments and people that are vile to your thinking set, you don't believe in Freedom of Speech at all.

[amazed!]

Well said Bejing Yank, and welcome to the forum.