(np) (political) the Big O institutes a new Cointelpro?

[Michael Bailey]

Robert Mahnke wrote:
> I don't understand why the paper is "truly pernicious."  From a first glance
> (thanks for the pointer), it's kinda fun, and doesn't bear much resemblance
> to the description below (in the sentence that starts, "In 2008").  While
> the phrase "cognitive infiltration" sounds sinister, the explanation of what
> it means (on page 14) -- counterspeech, either by the government or by
> formally hiring credible private parties, and informally enlisting private
> parties -- is something else entirely.  Maybe the phrase itself is bait for
> conspiracy theorists?
>

the vexing thing is that it isn't a question of being heard,
but of being believed.

hiring people who seem believable,
so as to reach certain groups that didn't believe the official spokespeople,
is like adding epicycles to an inexplicable orbit -

geez Louise! it's the information they didn't believe, not the people!
If Rense all of a sudden started saying, "19 terrorists hijacked 2 planes
and knocked down 3 buildings," the Rense demographic
would simply say, "They got to Rense!"

start telling the truth and don't stop.  respond to criticism with
facts, not rhetoric,
point for point.  maybe even change some policies when critics point
out flaws in them.  be for real!

 people will catch on!