Ignore everything that conflicts with the beliefs and/or the story  you are selling.   Apply the Universal Law of Thought. which, in part, says:  "To fight something is to feed it universal energy and make it stronger. "    The rule here is to simply ignore it.   

If you are forced to respond, do so with as few words as possible.   Remember to  "deny, deny, deny,"  to divert attention, and to  attack the opponent.   

The Classic example:

.

The Abortion example:

Asking questions in a manner that makes a statement and/or implies an answer.   In legal terms, you've probably heard this referred to as "Leading the Witness."

The Classic example:

.

The Abortion example:

References: 

And of course, put yourself in charge of the solution and then pay yourself handsomely for your services.   This is a variation on the technique of getting the people to demand what you want to impose upon them.  (See the next section below)

Chaos, confusion, grief, misery and all the other negative emotions, conditions, and circumstances are the breading ground for con artists.   The most sophisticate of them exploit and/or intentionally create problems and then set themselves up as the hero who solves the problems.

Why?   Because when people get desperate, they will make choices that under other circumstances they would never consider.    This technique combined with selling of the Con Artist's Solution is a master's tool to generate political and religious conversions and in doing so, make money and get workers for manifesting the con artist's Goals.    

Churches:   Churches destroy children's self esteem and replace it with dependency on the church.

Illegal Drugs:   Making certain drugs illegal has produced a need for police, political control, and prisons.   About seventy percent of all criminal activity is related to people who need money to buy drugs.

Computer Viruses:   Anti virus sellers need virus creators.   Did you ever wonder where all these computer viruses are coming from and why the anti-virus business is a multi-billion dollar business.   We'll apparently, a few billion dollars is not enough money.   Here's the latest twist in the anti-virus business.   I'll explain this with a historical example and then a personal story.

Plop Plop Fizz Fizz Oh What a Relief It Is.   You're almost certainly familiar with this classic advertising slogan for Alka-Seltzer.  Did you ever wonder where it came from or why?   The Executives of the company that owned and sold Alka-Seltzer went to their advertising agency and said we want to increase our sales.   The advertiser said, "That's simple, get your customers to take two tables instead of just one.   Thus was born "Plop Plop Fizz Fizz Oh What a Relief It Is."  Apparently someone in the anti-virus business also heard about Alka-Seltzer success story and decided to do likewise.    

Here's a personal experience:  I paid a major, multi-billion dollar anti-virus corporation for ant-virus services and though my computer was safe.   I began to have computer problems, and by the time I realized what was going on my computer software was so screwed up that I couldn't even start from scratch and reinstall the system software.   I had to take my computer to the repair shop.   This cost me days worth of time and effort and cost $139.90 in out of pocket dollars.   

What I discovered is that the company I had paid to protect my computer from having problem software come in and screw things up was doing only half a job.   They had divided the destructive programs into two categories and if a customer wanted protection from both halves of the problem software, they now had to pay twice the price.  The company now requires customers to also buy what is called a "Fire Wall."   If you don't pay twice, you get screwed.   Sounds like Al Capone has reincarnated and is now in the computers protection racket.

Here's the real solution to the virus problem:  If we took the profit out of the virus business, we'd have far fewer viruses and everybody would be better off, Except, of course, those who receive the short-term gains from the  virus/anti-virus business.   How do we do that?   The same way we provide streets, highways and public facilities that are available free of charge to anybody who want to use them.   What would it cost for one organization to provide anti-everything-harmful software free of charge to everybody in the entire world who wanted to use it.  The cost would be a tiny fraction of what we, collectively, are now paying the anti-virus companies for the privilege of not being violated.   And if you consider the costs in terms on lost data, wasted time and effort, the thought of doing anything else is absolutely ludicrous.   

One company is actually doing that for individual users.   You can now download, free of charge to personal users, anti-everything-harmful software at this address:  http://www.free-av.com/   The Pro-Truth Team members have been using this software on their personal computers since June 2004 and we have had problem-free computers since its instillation.

Additional Examples:   

Military hardware  sellers need wars.

Fascist police state politicians need terrorists.

Auto manufacturers need cars that break down and need to be replaced.

Clothing manufacturers need to have clothes to "go out of fashion."

Thousands of product many factures make product with built in
       obsolescence or that break and need repair or replacement.

Decide how you want to change the laws, find a way to sell you position, and get the public to demand those changes.   

Another way is to hide the legal changes you want in the form of an amendment and attach that amendment to a completely unrelated law that your opposition wants passed.

This technique involves starting or aggravating a conflict between two rival factions in a social group.   Creating a racial or religious conflict is quite simple.    Political divisiveness is also easy to create, aggravate,  and/or amplify.   

For example,  In the Early 1970's, the Watergate investigation disclosed that the Richard Nixon's reelection team planned to send a bunch of hoodlums to accost a rally where Nixon and Billy Graham were appearing together at a public function and then balm the fiasco on "those liberal hippies."

A classic technique in the art of confrontation is to polarize one group against another.    This technique has two primary applications.   

The first use is to get the opposition arguing and fighting among them selves.   In military terms, it's called divide and conquer.  It's also a common strategy in politics.   As an example, prior to the 2004, presidential election, some Republicans went to great length to get Ralph Nadar on the ballot.   They did so for the express purpose of taking votes from John Kerry.   

The second divisiveness tool is separating our side from the other guys.   Here's how it works:

We are the good guys,    
They are the bad guys.

Our side is moral, just, and right,   
The other side in immoral and wrong.  

God is on our side,   
The Devil is on their side.   

We wear the white hats,   
They wear black hats, black suites, dark shirts and bright colored ties.   

We are handsome, sexy, and attractive,   
They are grotesque, ugly, and want to violate us sexually.

We are loving God-fearing human beings,   
They are inhuman animals.  

We live by high standards,   
They will do anything to win.   

You can trust us, 
but you can't trust them.

Our side will keep you safe, 
But without our protection, the other side will kill you 
and your family, so you just do as we tell you.

We love apple pie and babies,     
They love liquor and kill babies.

And in my great grandfathers days:

Their women were whores who actually liked sex   
The women on our side, closed their eyes, gritted their teeth, 
and did it for the queen.

This technique and the "Get the Child" technique (below) are tandem tools of manipulation.   They are used primarily by major organization.   Both were important in the Former Russian Communist Regime.   They're not new.  Both are ancient in origin.   Both have been standard operating procedures used for centuries used by religious leaders.   

The "Chaos for Conversion" technique involves getting people into a state of high negative emotion (fear /anger) or accessing their minds when they are already in a state of high negative emotion.   While they are in that state, the manipulator offers "The One True Religion"  or "Our Political System" as "THE" answer to the person's problems.   (Every religion thinks that their beliefs represent the one and only true religion.   All others are considered to be just myths.)

Why seek states of high emotion?   Because that's how and where the controlling centers in the human mind are most easily reached and where beliefs are most easily altered.   Installing beliefs into a person's mind is the most successful technique presently known for controlling a person's behavior.   Installation is done primarily at two key points, either when the person is in a high negative emotion as mentioned above or when the person is a very young child, as described in the section below titled,  "Get the Child."

This technique is a partner to  the "Chaos for Conversion" technique (above).     It's based on the fact that a young child from birth to about age seven is very receptive and takes in almost everything as if it were the literal truth.   The intention is to program the minds of children before they are old enough to question what they are being told.   Once beliefs and behavior patterns are installed in their young minds, almost all of them will carry the beliefs and behavior patterns for the rest of their lives.   

Remember the old saying,  "You can't teach an old dog new tricks."   If you teach a puppy to tear up an old shoe, how do you later teach him the difference between an old shoe and a new one?   Well quite simply, you can't.    Although slightly more flexible that a dog's mind, the human mind follows this same pattern.  

Once the beliefs and behavior patterns are installed, it's relatively easy to access them, particularly in a state of emotional crisis such as found in the  "Chaos for Conversion" technique (above).   Have you ever noticed that at moments of stress in your life you find yourself reverting to a behavior pattern that you thought you had long since let go of?    It's called "Reverting to Type" and con artists count on it to control the masses in times of war and social chaos.   How do you think "Resident" Bush and his ego-atheist team got the so-called "Patriot Act" passed congress?  

The "Get the Child" technique is thousands of years old and has been used by churches and political groups  around the globe.   The Roman Catholic Church, the Moslem religion, and the former Russian, so-called communists are probable the best know users of this technique.

Make up rules for everybody to follow and then exclude yourself or your buddies from having to follow the rules.    Literally thousands of laws have been passed with this type of exclusionary clause in them.   For example, in the process of supposedly eliminating loan sharking, (charging excessive and outrageous interest on loans)  the federal government made it illegal for anyone to charge an interest rate above ten percent.   They conveniently excluded banks and credit card companies from having to comply with this law.   In essence, what this law did was move loan sharking from back alleys and hoodlum hangouts into the exclusive offices of the finacnce and banking industry.

Another variation of this theme is to design the rules so that no matter what happens, we win.    Lawyers, stock traders, and politicians  are notorious for this.    Some examples:  No matter who wins or looses a law suit, the lawyers always collect money.   No matter whether stock prices go up  or down, the stock broker always collects money.   

Set up a secret language so that you can give orders and if accused of misdeeds, you can deny having ever told anyone to do anything wrong.   This is a variation of the process in which military messages are encrypted so the enemy, although hearing the message, doesn't know what it means. 

A story about the Nixon Watergate scandal gave us a brief glimpse into this technique.   We have no idea if the following actually happened, but truth of fiction, it illustrates how a secret language works.   Nixon was reported to have said in the presence of Gordon Liddy, "I don't like John Dean."   This, in their secret language, this was an order to see to it that Dean ended up dead.    As the story goes, Liddy set out to kill Dean and the other team members had to go after him and stop him.

When caught in an unethical action, a scoundrel will often feign offence.   It puts the accuser on the defensive and it often works like magic in derailing a confrontation.   

There is a certain class of people who have a notoriously short life expectancy.  I'm referring to those who seriously threaten the status quo.   Here are a few names you might be familiar with:

.

There are dozens more who could justifiable added to this list.   

.

Those Who Know Too Much:   Literally hundreds of people who had information about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy died well before their time.    The statistical probability of all these people dying in the short time frame after the president's assassination ranged somewhere in the neighborhood of a billion to one.   (If you have access to the actual statistical data on this, please Contact Us.)

.

Control by Exclusion,  by Character Assassination, and by Career Destruction:   There are literally thousands of people, commonly called "whistle blowers,"  who have had their lived radically altered, their careers destroyed, and/or their reputations shattered because they publicly spoke the truth in the face of the lie.

.

The Elimination of Heroes:  Have you noticed that in the last few years, almost every person who could be looked up to as a hero /role mode has either died young or has been attacked and had their careers destroyed.   Here are a few names you might be familiar with:

John F. Kennedy Jr.

John Lennon

Pete Rose

Former President Bill Clinton

Martha Stewart

Michael Jackson

.

The Old Boys Club:    As you may have figured out by now, "The Old Boys Club"  is both alive and getting very desperate.    They too,  see "the hand writing on the wall" and know that, like all the other peddlers of death and misery, they, too, will soon be history.   They are; however, becoming increasingly desperate in their dying years.   Their clandestine acts of murder and character assassination, like the construction of the Berlin Wall, are act of desperation by those drowning in their own cesspool of ego, greed, and corruption.   See the page titled:  Winning with a Losing Issue --  Conflict sells and it's a Multi-Billion Dollar Business..

The Concept:   Those who use this approach, begin by looking for and finding people with the right psychological profile so that they can be either:  1)  consciously and intentionally invited to be part of the  team or 2) simply manipulated and used via clandestine means.   When they are found, the users of this concept do whatever is necessary to support the person's efforts against the opposition.   Lets examine how this works be looking at presidential politics.

John McCain:   In the 2000 presidential election primary John McCain was a republican outsider demanding campaign reform.  When he lost the primary to Mr. Bush, he was a crossroads in his political career.

McCain had very strong republican support.   He had strong independent voter support.   He had strong appeal to many Democrats.   He had strong appeal to young voters.   He had  strong appeal to the people who have simple turned their backs on voting because before McCain got in the race, there was no real choice.  He represented a fresh previously unheard of option in American politics.   

Because of this broad base of support, he had a real possibility of winning the presidential election as an independent.   If he had maintained his adamant demand for campaign reform and run as an independent, one of three three things could have happened:  1) He, and probably his family also, would have moved into that class of people who have a Short Life Expectancy ;   2)  He would have won the presidential election;   or 3)  Al Gore would have won the election.

Without McCain, the Republicans would never have gotten control to the United States government.   For reasons that the public will never know, Senator McCain sold himself to the Republican establishment.   The Republican unity was maintained.

The Ralph Nadar Example:   On the Democratic side in the 2000 presidential election,  Al gore was the Democratic candidate.   Ralph Nadar was also running for president on one of the lesser known party tickets.   

The Context:  Mr. Nadar had absolutely no chance whatsoever of winning the election.   The election was an extremely close race between the Democrats and the Republicans.    Mr. Nadar staying in the race, took votes from Al Gore so in essence a vote for Nadar was a vote for George Bush.  

Mr. Nadar had two options:  1)  He could maintain his adamant stance that "There is not one iota of difference between the Republican and the Democrats,"  and stay in the presidential race.    2)  He could have privately said to Al Gore,  "I'll stepped out of the race and ask my followers to support the Democrats in exchange for a position in your administration where I can work within the government for the causes I believe in.   That way, we'll both win."

Mr. Nadar chose the first option.   In the face of numerous appeals from his supporters to step out of the race, he refused and, by divide and conquer,  gave the White house to the Republicans.    In so doing he created numerous loses.   The Democrats lost.   Nadar lost.  His political career ended, because nobody in their right mind can possible vote for someone  who believes that "There is not one iota of difference between the Republican and the Democrats."  And most of all, the public lost.   

Often what appears to be two sides is actually only one side.   This is a close relative of the divide and conquer ploy and the  Lets you and him fight game.

In this scenario, the manipulators have two opposing sides fighting each other, but behind the scenes, there is a third group of con artists who manipulate and support, or aggravate and egg on both sides.   Probably the clearest example of this is the American political system.   No matter whether republicans or democrats are in charge, the public gets screwed.   There are obvious differences between the two sides, but the behind-the-scenes power brokers on both sides live by similar fundamental values:   
              Profit first;  me first; control at any cost;  people last; 
              environmental destruction is OK; what happens any one else
              or anything else is  irrelevant.

The second world war had the same financiers supporting both sides.   And who do you suppose was responsible for setting Saddam Hussein  up in Iraq.   Non other than the United Sates government.

The 1991 Gulf war, why was Saddam Hussein left in power?  Why did the American forces stop 34 kilometers from his palace and turn around and go home.   1)  Because those in control need an enemy.   Otherwise, how can you justify spending billions of dollars on military hardware.   2) Because  without an enemy, you can't justify installing fascist, police state laws, and imposing government secrecy.    3) Because those in control need chaos, confusion, grief, misery and all the other negative emotions, conditions, and circumstances in order to manipulate the masses and maintain control.   

The game is played by getting one group mad at the other,  and either sell weapons to both sides or use the conflict to amass more political power and control.  The divisive  issue doesn't matter, as long as it can be used to set one group against another.   Here are some examples:   The gay rights, the anti-abortion war,  religion against religion, such as protestants versus Catholics  in Northern Ireland.  Ethnic or racial conflicts such as Blacks against whites as in the U.S  or Moslems and Catholics in Bosnia.   Real physical wars such Afghanistan and Iraq.  

The so-called war on drugs is actually a ploy designed to stifle the competition, a technique to keep the prices high, a means of destroying the minds of the political dissenters, to way to increase crime and justify creating and maintaining a fascist police state and an elaborate prison system, a source of billions of secret dollars, and probably several more reasons that are not apparent at the moment.   

Where do you suppose all the drug money is going?   Do you really believe that hundreds of billions of dollars could be laundered every year and put back into the economy without the support of those running the world's governments?