COINTELL SABOTAGE..."MOLES" AND OTHER TYPES OF INSERT "ASSETS"

COINTELL SABOTAGE...MOLES AND OTHER INSERT "ASSETS"

(Note) This is an excerpt from an extended essay I am writing on the in's and out's of COINTELL Assets, The Delphi Technique and related issues as they pertain to modern grass roots and populist movements in North America.

-Cliff Mickelson

***
Of all the different classes of Cointell stealth "assets"..."moles" are probably one of the most difficult to "out." They are second perhaps only to a "sleeper." Both can be very effective assets as they can be successfully integrated to an acquired target organization both vertically as well as horizontally. (Although their practical applications differ substantially once they are inserted)
There exists a wide range of sophisticated methods for ferreting out moles. These "outing" techniques are "application specific," which is bureaucratic lingo for "If the shoe fits, better start tagging the foot that is wearing it."

One of the more obvious and esoteric ways to "out" a mole is through the use of information feeds. A host of static and specific parameters also can be applied to reduce the odds of moles slipping through the security net in the first place.

I am often asked to comment on the infiltration issue as it relates to the American Lyme disease community and the Morgellons disease community. To these communities the issue of "moles" is really not one of pressing concern.

Of greater concern is leadership "insertion"

Leadership "Insertion" assets are the tool of choice when dealing with issues whose successful resolution requires the cooperation of a skilled guild such as the medical profession.
This is a common tool of not only governments but also of industries and corporations who have something serious to hide.

The object of this type of asset is to arrive on the scene when the movement is still in its formative or even in an embryonic stages. The asset will have the professional qualifications needed to enable the movement to gain access or credibility in the field of its concern. (i.e., medicine)

The insertion asset will almost never be an active victim themselves but will express interest in wanting to further the cause of the community that has been targeted and, having been inserted at an early point, will soon become the primary focal point for said community.

Upon occasion, several such assets will be inserted into the target community at different times, early on. Neither asset will be aware of the role of the other. It will be the job of these assets to lead the target community around in circles for as long as possible and to block all true progress while projecting the appearance of being in the forefront of research and of the struggle for legitimacy...How to tell the difference between a legitimate "volunteer and an inserted "asset"? Not easy!....but a close scrutiny of these people will reveal that overall they are actually producing nothing!

This can only mean one of two things. They are an inserted "asset" or they are innocent of being an insert, but they are incompetent.

A telling hallmark of an "insertion" is that they almost always avoid answering direct questions of substance concerning the issues at stake. Instead.... They will often take a keen interest in the lives and personal interests of their immediate constituency. They will generally be very affable and friendly. They will seek to become "friends" with all those who matter around them in the organization. This is a clever, (and very effective) ploy as it tends to deflect criticism from within and also enables the hoodwinked associates of the asset to engage in denial.

Another common warning sign of an "asset" is the "volunteer" professional who suddenly shows up wanting to "help" and will usually initially contact one or two high profile member of the target community. They will then use that contact to springboard into the center of the existing organization. Keep in mind this is not always the case, but nonetheless...this "phenomena" is always something to watch for.

The bottom line for ferreting out such an asset is an ongoing and critical review of the results being produced by those claiming leadership roles. This is particularly true in the area of "research" since it is a rarefied and highly credential specific area.

If too much time goes by with no progress then serious questions need to be asked.
Even if such a person is not an "asset" the retention of an amateur or incompetent person in the center of an organization will produce the same effect as a professional asset. Either way, the organization is better off without them.

All leadership needs to be subjected to periodic "reviews" of the results they are producing in order to ascertain their true value to the organization. If they are not producing then they are no different from any other failed CEO. They need to go. And...The sooner the better.

-CliffMickelson