I think the most dangerous controlled opposition are those that are obviously well-funded and professional, pump out factual information, but never touch the nerves that need touching. Typically, they present righteously and fearlessly but take readers in harmless and time-wasting directions. Also typically, they will ban those who ask awkward questions. I consider this last aspect to be the dead giveaway. Some may disagree with my logic and I would be keen to hear other opinions before naming names.
These ConOps are just like the KGB and Stasi in the former USSR and E. Germany. The KGB/Stasi ops were embedded in every sphere of life; in culture and arts, Uni and schools, hospitals and every health agency, unions, media, etc. They stifled life of their fellow citizens! People lived in terror. The could not trust their neighbours or even some members of their family! This is how grave people had become. This is what the West has become by the hand of a few elite financers and thier globalist organisations. It's mind boggling to think about their "penetration" all around the world, including the NGOs like the UN, WHO, and the print and media conglomerates, secret services, government institutions and their quangos! Who can escape their tentacles? History repeats itself! Where is Ceausescu? Where is E. Germany and USSR? The same fate awaits those that think they are invincible! The God of the universe is watching this whole nasty game!
This is great, I'm working on my own piece about this topic - how would you categorize/describe the technique of using the clown figure to discredit truth. For example, Alex Jones famously said, "I don’t like them putting chemicals in the water that turn the frickin’ frogs gay!" among other things to the point that simply citing AJ is enough to discredit anything that he says.
Similarly, they've done this with Sandy Hook (he's a sandy hook truther) so that anything someone who supports that can be dismissed.
That falls under "discredit-by-association", which is a broad category, and refers to any sort of technique where either a discredited (or discreditable) action or belief is associated with a known or factual statement, and includes the beliefs and actions of the presenter of the argument themselves.
There is a variation on this where authorities will attempt to place slanderous or scandalous material on a genuine individual (for example, claiming to have 'found child porn'; most recent example is rape accusations of Julian Assange that never materialised) in order to simultaneously destroy the entire message and messenger.
You can spot the difference between the two: the former is always from the beginning, and the latter is always after the message has been published or revealed.
And I didn't finish my thought ha re" the gay frogs, because I think I'm looking at something that narrows it down a bit.
The fact is, while of course frogs don't have a sexual orientation, the chemicals in the water were causing frogs to change sex. Jones' putting it in such an absurd manner caused people to dismiss the idea entirely while he was in fact "telling the truth".
I knew what you meant even if you hadn't completed your thought. Discredit-by-association (DbA) is a broad term.
Within debate terminology, it is an off-shoot from the 'poisoning the well' fallacy, however poisoning the well is something the opponent does, not people "on your own side". DbA refers to when the 'home team' does it themselves intentionally.
Discredit-by-association is a term I've coined to describe the particular phenomena.
I haven't seen the chart which you're referring to. This article is based on my first hand experience and knowledge I've acquired over the last 14 years where I've been burned by countless underhanded tactics.
Your explanation of Con-ops sounds exactly what the WHO has become since Bill Gates bought his way into the once trusted but now corrupt organisation.
'Do NO Harm' and 'Informed Consent' were both removed from the Doctors Hippocratic Oath when Covid was invented. The medical profession nosedived into deceit and dishonesty by allowing Big Brother to dictate their medical actions and moral decisions.
A bit like altering the dictionary meaning of VACCINE twice in a decade to suit the DEADLY but USELESS Covid injection.
World Health Organisation is now redundant , CORRUPT and cannot be trusted since Bill Gates became their biggest benefactor (influencer). They are now being encouraged to take over the whole planets Health systems. Starting with obtaining the Authority to proclaim the next artificial Scamdemic, and then impose all the worst Controls and Disciplines that we experienced during the Covid Scamdemic.
With their Newly obtained powers they will be able to MANDATE INJECTIONS (called 'Vaccines') that will have little to do with human health - more like Total Control and Slavery!
What are we going to watch when all sportsmen & women have died from the Covid Injections? Apparently, there were 5 with heart issues in one University on the same day?
Some of us sceptics believed from the unbelievably speedy 'invention' of the DEADY COVID VAX they were at best 'SUSPECT'. ("Speed of Science" = My arse!) Now we all know they can be DEADLY!
The 'System' has allowed Flu to re-emerge and are trying to justify even more profit making injections (called vaccines).I suspect all injections might now be 'doctored' with unwanted dangerous additives!
More 'boosters that don't work? Just to sell more injectable crap into, our already devastated bodies.
If we continue to refuse the DEADLY COVID INJECTION, can Doctors still prescribe 'Sudden Early Death Syndrome (SADS) for us?
Do any Doctors still remember "Do no harm" as part of their oath to provide professional conduct?
Heart DAMAGE from Covid Vax is permanent!
What about 'Informed Consent'? That was formally terminated as a Patient courtesy or requirement the same Date Covid Vax cheated it's way into the market with an unjustified (EUA) Emergency Use Authorisation - because they got the FDA to agree that IVERMECTIN & several other proven pre-existing Safe & Effective anti-viral medicines did not exist, or, if they did, "They're only for animals."!
Big Pharma Covid injections (called "vaccines"???) = NO 'LIABILITY' = LICENCE TO KILL with impunity!
Why do the CDC refer to DEADLY VAX 'DANGER SIGNALS' as "Safety Signals"? This Poison is made with NO GUARANTEE of SAFETY or EFFICACY by unethical and massively profitable organisations that accept NO RESPONSIBILITY for any/all ADVERSE REACTIONS or/and DEATHS that follow their supposed DEPOPULATING 'cures'. The word 'MIOCARDITIS' is now part of our daily vocabulary!
The crap is so unreliable, that now NEW AILMENTS are being (invented) discovered like SUDDEN EARLY DEATH SYNDROME (SADS)! High functioning athletes are dropping like flies!
Why would anybody play RUSSIAN ROULETTE with their otherwise healthy bodies, and those of their innocent children! Apparently there are now 770 different adverse reactions recorded that relate to Covid injections (ridiculously referred to as "VACCINES").
LIABILITY MUST BE REINTRODUCED for these Bio-weapons designed for depopulation of the planet!
Such tools require mammoth amounts of effort. In the US, the closest might be Open Secrets (https://www.opensecrets.org/), which tracks who receives finances from whom.
These by themselves aren't sufficient coverage and only deals with the really obvious financial and voting records of politicians
ConOps are typically private individuals, and are classically more insidious, as it tends to be more reputation damage and words, rather than concrete financial connections. It's very easy for them to escape scrutiny by withdrawing a statement after being exposed.
Collating every sentence someone says is, as said, a mammoth task, especially when you consider how many people there might be and how often they might write or speak. By the time you've checked what they've said, they will have written a hundred more.
Instead, it's easier to ignore everything until proof is provided, and simply focus on collecting evidence.
The enemy already has such a tool and will then use it to silence us. Fact checkers. I can't see passed the proselytised opinions of those we are already familiar with. Fellow readers who have been accurate and outspoken for years, might be a good start.
You have interesting ideas Kalle. There's nothing stopping you from building them, or perhaps either finding volunteers or hiring gig economy workers to implement. I'm overcommitted in terms of the corruption I'm fighting, and I'm too impoverished to finance anything external.
Personally I think the database submission idea Sarah had for the peer reviewed studies showing harms for the shots where people could submit links to be reviewed (to prevent malicious insertions) and then added to a growing list that was public/downloadable/searchable might be another starting point.
That sort of system would be a pretty simple PHP webhost server front-end pushing data through a series of sanity and anti-SQL-injection attack filters, plus some 'no duplicates' checks and removal of any 'bloat metadata', into an SQLite database table utilising ZLIB compression, with a review table and a completed review table. Costs would be a webhost, finding volunteers to search for studies and push in, and finding trusted reviewers who can check the supplied links to ensure they're good quality/not misleading/not garbage/not spam/not malware etc.
In terms of ConOps they're a dime a dozen. You'll whack one and ten more hired goons will appear.
There's two things they loathe:
1) High quality, well laid out, easy-to-understand evidence, that is
2) Widely spread
It's the second part I classically have difficulty with.
"Current state of existence of the unvaccinated is still so weak that no real controlled opposition is really needed."
Controlled opposition's existence isn't determined by how weak or not weak a movement is perceived to be (and certainly you'd need to supply evidence for why they'd follow your particular standard?).
US governor Ron DeSantis is bringing a Grand Jury against Pfizer and their cohorts, vaccine mandates are being successfully challenged, they've lost narrative control on social media, and the death count on VAERS continues to skyrocket, as those who continue to support vaccines dwindle in number, either due to adverse experiences or just outright death. I would not call that weak and I reject your premise.
"There were those suggestions that Robert Malone is controlled opposition."
No-one's name is mentioned in the article, and certainly not Robert Malone's.
In-fact, the only person I've publicly called ConOp so far is Elon Musk in a dedicated, much earlier article, but the Daily Beagle has provided a landslide of evidence for him still working with mRNA manufacturing via Tesla for the CureVac shots (see: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/elon-is-part-of-the-vaccine-crowd), so it isn't an 'accusation' so much as a very well evidenced major conflict-of-interest in a grandstanding, popularised figure.
I don't know why you'd be objecting to any of the categories. Are you honestly suggesting we tolerate dishonest reporting and misleading claims, wasteful expenditure, weak litigation and do-nothing attitudes?
mRNA has killed people, has not been sufficiently tested, and mass manufacturing those mRNA shots aiding this industry is not an "ethical standard", and there is no proof of your claim he has higher standards than Pfizer when it comes to the shots or the manufacturing, and sounds suspiciously like idol worship rather than evidenced justification.
To be honest your kneejerk hostility on the methodology of dishonest fraudsters and attempt to defend unethical pharmaceutical industry aiding practices seems highly questionable to me.
Why are you choosing not to hold Elon or any of the others to account?
Earlier, I did not mention iconic individuals, only online publications, but I most certainly have my doubts about the former category. I'm just not sure it's a good idea, right at this moment, to "out" somebody who is a leading or even peripheral part of our movement.
For example, I have been researching vaccines since 1998 and I am now certain that all are dangerous, and all are inneffective compared to natural immunity. Yet our idolised medical heroes are all vaccine experts. This jars with me but I keep it to myself, "for the greater good", ironically LOL.
I think the most dangerous controlled opposition are those that are obviously well-funded and professional, pump out factual information, but never touch the nerves that need touching. Typically, they present righteously and fearlessly but take readers in harmless and time-wasting directions. Also typically, they will ban those who ask awkward questions. I consider this last aspect to be the dead giveaway. Some may disagree with my logic and I would be keen to hear other opinions before naming names.
These ConOps are just like the KGB and Stasi in the former USSR and E. Germany. The KGB/Stasi ops were embedded in every sphere of life; in culture and arts, Uni and schools, hospitals and every health agency, unions, media, etc. They stifled life of their fellow citizens! People lived in terror. The could not trust their neighbours or even some members of their family! This is how grave people had become. This is what the West has become by the hand of a few elite financers and thier globalist organisations. It's mind boggling to think about their "penetration" all around the world, including the NGOs like the UN, WHO, and the print and media conglomerates, secret services, government institutions and their quangos! Who can escape their tentacles? History repeats itself! Where is Ceausescu? Where is E. Germany and USSR? The same fate awaits those that think they are invincible! The God of the universe is watching this whole nasty game!
This is great, I'm working on my own piece about this topic - how would you categorize/describe the technique of using the clown figure to discredit truth. For example, Alex Jones famously said, "I don’t like them putting chemicals in the water that turn the frickin’ frogs gay!" among other things to the point that simply citing AJ is enough to discredit anything that he says.
Similarly, they've done this with Sandy Hook (he's a sandy hook truther) so that anything someone who supports that can be dismissed.
That falls under "discredit-by-association", which is a broad category, and refers to any sort of technique where either a discredited (or discreditable) action or belief is associated with a known or factual statement, and includes the beliefs and actions of the presenter of the argument themselves.
There is a variation on this where authorities will attempt to place slanderous or scandalous material on a genuine individual (for example, claiming to have 'found child porn'; most recent example is rape accusations of Julian Assange that never materialised) in order to simultaneously destroy the entire message and messenger.
You can spot the difference between the two: the former is always from the beginning, and the latter is always after the message has been published or revealed.
And I didn't finish my thought ha re" the gay frogs, because I think I'm looking at something that narrows it down a bit.
The fact is, while of course frogs don't have a sexual orientation, the chemicals in the water were causing frogs to change sex. Jones' putting it in such an absurd manner caused people to dismiss the idea entirely while he was in fact "telling the truth".
Part I is here: https://reportsfromtherabbithole.substack.com/p/right-on-q not trying to clog up your stack with self-promotion, just thought you might enjoy/be interested.
---
Also, I once saw a neat / well-done chart on how to spot Conops within the MAM like
"high quality production" √
"sudden appearance" √
"promoted by known CO"
Etc...with the more check boxes the more likely, etc...have you made something like that, or seen what I'm speaking of?
I knew what you meant even if you hadn't completed your thought. Discredit-by-association (DbA) is a broad term.
Within debate terminology, it is an off-shoot from the 'poisoning the well' fallacy, however poisoning the well is something the opponent does, not people "on your own side". DbA refers to when the 'home team' does it themselves intentionally.
Discredit-by-association is a term I've coined to describe the particular phenomena.
I haven't seen the chart which you're referring to. This article is based on my first hand experience and knowledge I've acquired over the last 14 years where I've been burned by countless underhanded tactics.
Your explanation of Con-ops sounds exactly what the WHO has become since Bill Gates bought his way into the once trusted but now corrupt organisation.
'Do NO Harm' and 'Informed Consent' were both removed from the Doctors Hippocratic Oath when Covid was invented. The medical profession nosedived into deceit and dishonesty by allowing Big Brother to dictate their medical actions and moral decisions.
A bit like altering the dictionary meaning of VACCINE twice in a decade to suit the DEADLY but USELESS Covid injection.
World Health Organisation is now redundant , CORRUPT and cannot be trusted since Bill Gates became their biggest benefactor (influencer). They are now being encouraged to take over the whole planets Health systems. Starting with obtaining the Authority to proclaim the next artificial Scamdemic, and then impose all the worst Controls and Disciplines that we experienced during the Covid Scamdemic.
With their Newly obtained powers they will be able to MANDATE INJECTIONS (called 'Vaccines') that will have little to do with human health - more like Total Control and Slavery!
What are we going to watch when all sportsmen & women have died from the Covid Injections? Apparently, there were 5 with heart issues in one University on the same day?
Some of us sceptics believed from the unbelievably speedy 'invention' of the DEADY COVID VAX they were at best 'SUSPECT'. ("Speed of Science" = My arse!) Now we all know they can be DEADLY!
The 'System' has allowed Flu to re-emerge and are trying to justify even more profit making injections (called vaccines).I suspect all injections might now be 'doctored' with unwanted dangerous additives!
More 'boosters that don't work? Just to sell more injectable crap into, our already devastated bodies.
If we continue to refuse the DEADLY COVID INJECTION, can Doctors still prescribe 'Sudden Early Death Syndrome (SADS) for us?
Do any Doctors still remember "Do no harm" as part of their oath to provide professional conduct?
Heart DAMAGE from Covid Vax is permanent!
What about 'Informed Consent'? That was formally terminated as a Patient courtesy or requirement the same Date Covid Vax cheated it's way into the market with an unjustified (EUA) Emergency Use Authorisation - because they got the FDA to agree that IVERMECTIN & several other proven pre-existing Safe & Effective anti-viral medicines did not exist, or, if they did, "They're only for animals."!
Big Pharma Covid injections (called "vaccines"???) = NO 'LIABILITY' = LICENCE TO KILL with impunity!
Why do the CDC refer to DEADLY VAX 'DANGER SIGNALS' as "Safety Signals"? This Poison is made with NO GUARANTEE of SAFETY or EFFICACY by unethical and massively profitable organisations that accept NO RESPONSIBILITY for any/all ADVERSE REACTIONS or/and DEATHS that follow their supposed DEPOPULATING 'cures'. The word 'MIOCARDITIS' is now part of our daily vocabulary!
The crap is so unreliable, that now NEW AILMENTS are being (invented) discovered like SUDDEN EARLY DEATH SYNDROME (SADS)! High functioning athletes are dropping like flies!
Why would anybody play RUSSIAN ROULETTE with their otherwise healthy bodies, and those of their innocent children! Apparently there are now 770 different adverse reactions recorded that relate to Covid injections (ridiculously referred to as "VACCINES").
LIABILITY MUST BE REINTRODUCED for these Bio-weapons designed for depopulation of the planet!
Mick from Hooe (UK) Unjabbed to live longer!
Such tools require mammoth amounts of effort. In the US, the closest might be Open Secrets (https://www.opensecrets.org/), which tracks who receives finances from whom.
In the UK, the closest is 'TheyWorkForYou' (https://www.theyworkforyou.com/) who track how MPs vote on various bills.
These by themselves aren't sufficient coverage and only deals with the really obvious financial and voting records of politicians
ConOps are typically private individuals, and are classically more insidious, as it tends to be more reputation damage and words, rather than concrete financial connections. It's very easy for them to escape scrutiny by withdrawing a statement after being exposed.
Collating every sentence someone says is, as said, a mammoth task, especially when you consider how many people there might be and how often they might write or speak. By the time you've checked what they've said, they will have written a hundred more.
Instead, it's easier to ignore everything until proof is provided, and simply focus on collecting evidence.
It's why in articles I try to highlight evidence, excerpts, quotes, datasets, statistics, and disclaim any limitations, and do things like collate studies (For example: https://gitlab.com/TheUnderdog/general-research/-/blob/main/COVID-19-Shot-Questions/Part2/StudiesDatabase.csv).
The enemy already has such a tool and will then use it to silence us. Fact checkers. I can't see passed the proselytised opinions of those we are already familiar with. Fellow readers who have been accurate and outspoken for years, might be a good start.
I think you overestimate people's willingness to volunteer free time to a cause.
I can't even get people to pay sufficient money for the work I'm doing.
You have interesting ideas Kalle. There's nothing stopping you from building them, or perhaps either finding volunteers or hiring gig economy workers to implement. I'm overcommitted in terms of the corruption I'm fighting, and I'm too impoverished to finance anything external.
Personally I think the database submission idea Sarah had for the peer reviewed studies showing harms for the shots where people could submit links to be reviewed (to prevent malicious insertions) and then added to a growing list that was public/downloadable/searchable might be another starting point.
That sort of system would be a pretty simple PHP webhost server front-end pushing data through a series of sanity and anti-SQL-injection attack filters, plus some 'no duplicates' checks and removal of any 'bloat metadata', into an SQLite database table utilising ZLIB compression, with a review table and a completed review table. Costs would be a webhost, finding volunteers to search for studies and push in, and finding trusted reviewers who can check the supplied links to ensure they're good quality/not misleading/not garbage/not spam/not malware etc.
In terms of ConOps they're a dime a dozen. You'll whack one and ten more hired goons will appear.
There's two things they loathe:
1) High quality, well laid out, easy-to-understand evidence, that is
2) Widely spread
It's the second part I classically have difficulty with.
"Seems to me all the accusations about controlled opposition are premature."
Why are they premature? And accusations at whom?
"Current state of existence of the unvaccinated is still so weak that no real controlled opposition is really needed."
Controlled opposition's existence isn't determined by how weak or not weak a movement is perceived to be (and certainly you'd need to supply evidence for why they'd follow your particular standard?).
US governor Ron DeSantis is bringing a Grand Jury against Pfizer and their cohorts, vaccine mandates are being successfully challenged, they've lost narrative control on social media, and the death count on VAERS continues to skyrocket, as those who continue to support vaccines dwindle in number, either due to adverse experiences or just outright death. I would not call that weak and I reject your premise.
"There were those suggestions that Robert Malone is controlled opposition."
No-one's name is mentioned in the article, and certainly not Robert Malone's.
In-fact, the only person I've publicly called ConOp so far is Elon Musk in a dedicated, much earlier article, but the Daily Beagle has provided a landslide of evidence for him still working with mRNA manufacturing via Tesla for the CureVac shots (see: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/elon-is-part-of-the-vaccine-crowd), so it isn't an 'accusation' so much as a very well evidenced major conflict-of-interest in a grandstanding, popularised figure.
I don't know why you'd be objecting to any of the categories. Are you honestly suggesting we tolerate dishonest reporting and misleading claims, wasteful expenditure, weak litigation and do-nothing attitudes?
mRNA has killed people, has not been sufficiently tested, and mass manufacturing those mRNA shots aiding this industry is not an "ethical standard", and there is no proof of your claim he has higher standards than Pfizer when it comes to the shots or the manufacturing, and sounds suspiciously like idol worship rather than evidenced justification.
To be honest your kneejerk hostility on the methodology of dishonest fraudsters and attempt to defend unethical pharmaceutical industry aiding practices seems highly questionable to me.
Why are you choosing not to hold Elon or any of the others to account?
Earlier, I did not mention iconic individuals, only online publications, but I most certainly have my doubts about the former category. I'm just not sure it's a good idea, right at this moment, to "out" somebody who is a leading or even peripheral part of our movement.
For example, I have been researching vaccines since 1998 and I am now certain that all are dangerous, and all are inneffective compared to natural immunity. Yet our idolised medical heroes are all vaccine experts. This jars with me but I keep it to myself, "for the greater good", ironically LOL.