Techniques

The purpose of targeting is to legally entrap you and/or make you appear mentally ill (via voice-to-skull). Government agencies try to make you depend on drugs such as alcohol, sleeping medications, opiates, or psychiatric drugs (which do not treat hearing sounds when targeted, unlike those with actual mental illness) to cope with the voice-to-skull torture. Do not fall for their trap. They want to imprison you, have you institutionalized, estrange you from loved ones, destroy your career, and generally ruin your quality of life. These government agencies use techniques such as character assassination, gaslighting, and what is described below as “Personality Bombarding“. An additional technique is miraging, which is the promise or repeated iteration that the voice-to-skull torture will be removed, but ultimately never will. Lastly, Stockholm Syndrome is used on targeted individuals, so they comply and follow their perpetrators orders. This is most likely a extra-judicial penal or genocide program. The text directly below was directly derived from my own experiences with voice-to-skull technologies, whereas the text at the bottom of the page comes from the Psychological Operations Process Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures; Headquarters Department of the Army (August 2007)

Character Assassination
Character assassination is a deliberate and sustained process that destroys the credibility and reputation of a person, institution, organization, social group, or nation. Agents of character assassinations employ a mix of open and covert methods to achieve their goals, such as raising false accusations, planting and fostering rumors, and manipulating information.

Character assassination is an attempt to tarnish a person’s reputation. It may involve exaggeration, misleading half-truths, or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. It is a form of defamation and can be a form of ad hominem argument.

For living individuals targeted by character assassination attempts, this may result in being rejected by their community, family, or members of their living or work environment. Such acts are often difficult to reverse or rectify, and the process is likened to a literal assassination of a human life. The damage sustained can last a lifetime or, for historical figures, for many centuries after their death.

Gaslighting
Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, hoping to make them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target’s belief.

Personality Bombarding
-Attacks on religious beliefs, race, ethnicity, political affiliation, gender, and sexual orientation. “You know what, you are you are [first name]? A liberal. You know what liberals are [first name], you know what…..liberals are hippy losers.”
-Continual alienation of what one one defines as their self-actualized being or soul. “You are such a loser compared to me [first name]. You are such a loser that you can’t meet a girl to date anymore. I get a lot of women [first name] in Washington,DC.”
-Use of repeated false flags, to confine or decimate one’s personal beliefs, and/or scare an individual. “I’m the FBI you did some bad things [first name]. You’re a bad person [first name].”

Stockholm Syndrome
Stockholm syndrome is a condition that causes hostages to develop a psychological alliance with their captors as a survival strategy during captivity. These feelings, resulting from a bond formed between captor and captives during intimate time spent together, are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims. Generally speaking, Stockholm syndrome consists of “strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other.” 

Strategies Against These Techniques-
-Reverse psychology against the perps beliefs against your personal beliefs. “Actually perp, you are the loser because you are so oppressive with your beliefs, and am not a free thinker.”
-Display of Objectionable materials (obscene, offensive, or anarchistic music and/or material that is not viewed [played repeatedly on a device that is a closed laptop or under a pillow and not viewable to the targeted individual].
-Repeated contrary response to a perps repeated phrases.
-Mocking or satirizing a perps personality attacks.

Common Voice-to-Skull Phrasing Techniques

Miraging: “We are taking this program off of you soon.”

Bargaining: “If you stop yelling at me, I will take you off this program.”

False Flagging: “We are Russian hackers, not the CIA.

“We are ISIS, not the US Military.”

“This is anonymous. Not the NSA.”

Loop Of Despair: (sounds like a hypnotist repeating phrases endlessly): “This is the NSA. We don’t know why you were put on this program. We can’t take you off of this. This is what the rest of your life will be like. We want your family to freak out. We have you on this for your lifetime.”

Other Examples Phrases Heard via Voice-to-Skull Similar to CIA Interrogation and United States Army PsyOps Techniques:

-“You can’t eat. You can’t sleep. You can’t breathe.” (CIA/Military torture techniques used at Black-sites and at Guantanamo Bay, know as sensory deprivation)
-“We want you in a place where you can’t do anything.” (Mental hospital where you have no access to the outside world/computers/cell phone)
-“You can’t make it through. You can’t live the life you wanted. You cant have a good time anymore.”
-“It’s not what you wanted on you.”
-“We have taken you off of this before.”
-“Everybody who is on this has a bad time.”
-“We do this to you for this reason.”
-“I tried to make this work. I tried to make you look like
somebody who couldn’t handle this.”
-“Take this off of yourself.”
-“Every time you look for ways to take this off of you,
we keep it on you longer.”
-“I had you off of this program…..”
-“I’m going to tell you why we do this….we do
this because…..”
-“Try to make you look like someone who was
talking about this.”
-“We have other ways to make this work.”
-“You won’t be able to make it through this….”
-“This wasn’t a good life. I don’t know what to do. I just
want you off of this.”

Psychological Operations Process Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures; Headquarters Department of the Army (August 2007)

Techniques
2-102. For the purposes of TAA, techniques refer to the specific methods used to present information to the TA. Effective persuasion techniques are based on the conditions affecting the TA and the type of information being presented. Determining the most effective technique or combination of techniques to
persuade the TA is only accomplished through a cultivated understanding of the TA and its behavior.

2-103. Persuasion and influence are the primary tools of PSYOP. As such, PSYOP Soldiers must strive to become familiar with, and ultimately develop, tactical and technical proficiency in the use of persuasion techniques. The following are some specific techniques used to present supporting arguments to the TA:
• Glittering generalities. These are intense, emotionally appealing words so closely associated with highly valued concepts and beliefs that the appeals are convincing without being supported by fact or reason. The appeals are directed toward such emotions as love of country and home, and desire for peace, freedom, glory, and honor.
• Transference. This technique projects positive or negative qualities of a person, entity, object, or value to another. It is generally used to transfer blame from one party in a conflict to another.
• Least of evils. This technique acknowledges that the COA being taken is perhaps undesirable, but emphasizes that any other COA would result in a worse outcome.
• Name-calling. Name-calling seeks to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda as something the TA fears, loathes, or finds undesirable.
• Plain folks or common man. This approach attempts to convince the audience that the position noted in the PSYOP argument is actually the same as that of the TA. This technique is designed to win the confidence of the audience by communicating in the usual manner and style of the audience. Communicators use ordinary or common language, mannerisms, and clothes in face-to-face and other audiovisual communications when they attempt to identify their point of view with that of the average person.
• Testimonials. Testimonials are quotations (in and out of context) that are cited to support or reject a given policy, action, program, or personality. The reputation or the role of the individual giving the statement is exploited. There can be different types of testimonial authority. Official testimonials use endorsements or the approval of people in authority or well known in a particular field. Personal sources of testimonials may include hostile leaders, fellow soldiers, opposing leaders, famous scholars, writers, popular heroes, and other personalities.
• Insinuation. Insinuation is used to create or increase TA suspicions of ideas, groups, or individuals as a means of dividing the adversary. The PSYOP Soldier hints, suggests, and implies, but lets the TA draw its own conclusions.
• Presenting the other side. Some people in a TA believe that neither of the belligerents is entirely virtuous. To them, messages that express concepts solely in terms of right and wrong may not be credible. Agreement with minor aspects of the enemy’s point of view may overcome this cynicism.
• Simplification. In this technique, facts are reduced to either right, wrong, good, or evil. The technique provides simple solutions for complex problems and offers simplified interpretations of events, ideas, concepts, or personalities.
• Compare and contrast. Two or more ideas, issues, or choices are compared and differences between them are explained. This technique is effective if the TA has a needs conflict that must be resolved.
• Compare for similarities. Two or more ideas, issues, or objects are compared to try and liken one to the other. This technique tries to show that the desired behavior or attitude (SPO) is similar to one that has already been accepted by the TA.
• Illustrations and narratives. An illustration is a detailed example of the idea that is being presented. It is an example that makes abstract or general ideas easier to comprehend. If it is in a story form, it is a narrative.
• Specific instances. These are a list of examples that help prove the point.
• Statistics. Statistics have a certain authority, but they must be clear enough to show the TA why they are relevant. In most cases, it is best to keep the statistical evidence simple and short so the TA can easily absorb it.
• Explanations. These are used when a term or idea is unfamiliar to the TA.

 

 

Psychological Operations Process
Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures; Headquarters Department of the Army (August 2007) Pages 68-71. 

Primary Influence Tactics
2-104. These primary influence tactics are widely applicable to many situations, cultures, and TAs. By using the appropriate influence tactics in products and actions, the persuasiveness of PSYOP will be magnified. The following are examples of primary influence tactics:
• Rewards and punishments: “If you do X, you will get Y,” or “if you do not do X, Y will happen to you.” Example: “Surrender, and you will be treated well; continue to fight, and you will be killed.”
• Expertise: “Speaking as an authority on the subject, I can tell you that rewards/punishments will occur if you do or do not do X.” Example: “Oil Minister Gregor (key communicator/expert) states that if rebel groups continue to sabotage oil pipelines, the national economy will beseriously affected.”
• Gifts: Giving something as a gift before requesting compliance. The idea is that the target will feel the need to reciprocate later. Example: “This well and cistern are a gift to the people of Birmingville from the coalition forces…demonstration of our good will and hope for mutual cooperation in the future.”
• Debt: Calling in past favors. Example: “Coalition forces have done a lot for Birmingville, Elder Chang: the new school, the well in the center of town… these insurgents are endangering all we have worked for together. We need your help in stopping these groups by reporting any information you and your people may discover.”
• Aversive stimulation: Continuous punishment, and the cessation of punishment, is contingent on compliance. Example: “We will continue to bomb your position unless you surrender immediately.”
• Moral appeal: Entails finding moral common ground, and then using the moral commitments of a person to obtain compliance. Example: “The killing of innocent civilians is wrong; please help the security forces stop this tragic loss of innocent life by reporting any information on terrorist activities.”
• Positive and negative self-feeling: “You will feel better/bad if you do X.” Example: “Become part of something bigger than yourself, know honor and take pride in your work…join the national security forces!”
• Positive and negative altercasting: “Good people do X / Bad people do Y.” Example: “Red Tribe members are brave and honorable people who care about the future of their country and are not intimidated by rebel groups. Call and report insurgent activity now on the coalition hotline.”
• Positive and negative esteem of others: “Other people will think highly/less of you if you do X.” Example: “Earn the respect of your friends and the pride of your family…join the Patriotsville National Guard now!”
• Fear: “Bad things will happen to you if you do X.” Example: “Only death and fire await those who continue to fight…surrender now.”

Cialdini’s Six Principles of Influence
2-105. These six principles are relevant to virtually any culture and any TA. By applying and combining these six basic principles, PSYOP Soldiers can increase their effectiveness in persuading a TA. These principles are particularly effective in face-to-face PSYOP:
• Principle of scarcity: People value more what they can have less of. They typically associate greater value with things that are rare, dwindling in availability, or difficult to acquire. PSYOP Soldiers should highlight unique benefits and exclusive information to persuade.
• Principle of authority: People are more easily persuaded by individuals perceived to be
legitimate authorities or experts. They defer to experts who provide shortcuts to decisions requiring specialized information. PSYOP Soldiers should not assume their expertise is self-evident.
• Principle of social proof: People often look to the behavior of those around them for direction about what choices to make. This action is heightened when those around them are similar in terms of age, education, social standing, and experience. PSYOP Soldiers should use peer pressure whenever and wherever available.
• Principle of liking: People prefer to say yes and to comply with the requests of those they like. To influence, PSYOP Soldiers should uncover real similarities and offer genuine praise.
• Principle of reciprocity: If someone grants favors, invited or uninvited, an overpowering need to repay that favor immediately blooms within the recipient of that favor. This human trait transcends all cultures and races.
• Principle of consistency: The desire for consistency is a central motivator of behavior. The drive to look and be consistent is a highly potent weapon of social influence, often causing people to act in ways that are clearly contrary to their own best interests. People do not like to appear inconsistent to others. Inconsistent behavior produces psychological tension that must be avoided. It is human nature that people strive to feel good about themselves, which includes behaving IAW their important values and beliefs. When the behavior is consistent with who people are and what they value, they feel good. People align with their clear commitments. PSYOP Soldiers should make others’ commitments active, public, and voluntary.