Mid West News & Discussion

Provably True
This is the highest category of truth, in that it is substantiated by documentation, including audio or video recordings. For non-law-enforcement operations, witness statements are insufficient as these carry no legal weight (4). A signed official statement is the highest standard of truth, not so much in what the statement says, which is often a lie, but that the statement itself was made. Just below a paper document in value is the audio or video recording of something an official said, which is why they hate being recorded. Information at this level can be made public, including identifying information about the guilty parties if desired, with little risk of defamation (5). However, circumstances may dictate using it indirectly for psychological warfare purposes as if it were only presumed true.

Provably False
The mirror image of provably true is provably false, or in our context, an official lie captured for posterity either as a document or a recorded statement. Much of your intelligence operation will drive toward the capstone of a recorded public lie or admission of misbehavior made by an official, or a last-ditch desperate official lie on paper. A false official statement is, by itself, legally actionable as a crime, and often will substantiate violation of RICO laws. As such, a provably false piece of information is the most valuable product of this entire process. As with provably true information, provably false information can be made public with little risk of civil blowback (6). Again, however, your team may wish to use it for psychological warfare purposes in a more limited way in the short term to flush more guilty or colluding parties out of hiding, or to cause would-be supporters to withdraw from the guilty parties once they understand the consequences of supporting criminal behavior (7).
In this article, we’ve laid the foundation for how to classify information and take it along a chain of steps leading to provably true or provably false information (8). In upcoming articles we’ll show some real-world examples of how we’ve used this process to develop raw information into actionable intelligence.

Footnotes:
(1) Then there is actual work-work. Also, a new sheriff has taken office and we’re still dialing in our resources for this development to see which path he chooses. Finally, our attorney is knee-deep in some filings he is working on, so we’ve been putting a lot of brain energy into supporting that. Plus, hey, with the three back-to-back holidays behind us and the big Inaugural bash tomorrow, the local crime and corruption syndicate has caught a breather, too. Sometimes you just have to take time to bask.

(2) Military and law enforcement operations can get by with fewer categories than our local operation can afford. Military operations, especially those in-extremis, can simply shoot or not shoot based on relatively flimsy information. Law enforcement operations, although presumably held to a higher standard of evidence, can lie to witnesses and suspects with impunity, and are often encouraged to do so; most crimes are “solved” by wrangling confessions or coercing plea-bargains, even from the innocent. In a local intelligence operation such as what we are running, you are further constrained by the necessity to avoid both defamation and extortion, which requires operating to a higher standard of truth when going public with information, as well as limits on what you can do with the information you have.

(3) Similarly, having a hidden meeting in violation of open meetings laws, failing to completely and promptly respond to open records requests, or refusing to answer questions during public meetings carries the same weight, in local intelligence terms, as a lie. Any of these should cause the issue at hand to receive a bump in priority.

(4) For our purposes, witness statements fall into the presumed true/presumed false categories, and inform, but do not replace, other collection operations.

35 views06:36