On spies and stratagems/Target
Types of operations
There are two root types of operations, those that have an official cover and those that have no official cover (NOC).
Official cover means that the agency is not only fully aware of the operation, but if there is a blow-back or agents are captured or detected, it will acknowledge its involvement. This type of decision is mostly a political and has at root diplomatic interests. The definition also clarifies the agents on how secure they will be if the mission fails, it may not only mean life or death but spending long times in captivity at times even without an acknowledgment of their capture.
Operational subgroups (OSGs)
Self contained support operations or activities. It can cover many aspects of non specific functions transport, resource gathering even multi-agency operation coordination.
- Rouge source
The concept of a rouge source is that of someone to pass or create false intelligence that not only is found acceptable by the agent (or agency). Most sources as we have seen pass some levels of scrutiny to verify that they are not a plant or source of misdirection. The problem is when a source has no clear ties to the target it is providing information or when the agent (or agency) fails to understand the motivation behind the false information provided.
"making a drop"
A dead drop is an indirect delivery or even exchange. The object will be of a physical nature, information media or specific hardware. The dead drop is defined by pre-establishing a specific location for dropping the package, this will sometimes also include some sort of protocol to indicate that the drop will take place to the receiver, and may also include countermeasures in case the agent that will execute the drop thinks he is under observation, as to indicate that the content is false or that the receiver should stay away as to avoid himself being identified or captured.
"to turn someone"
The direct action of subversion of an opposing agent or asset, the creating a defector, to "bring over" that asset to work toward the agency objectives. A good operative path to advance counter intelligence, not only as a source of intelligence about the opposition but also as a way to infiltrate them, if the one turned agrees to act as a double agent or indicates someone that can be put to that task. A rotten apple can spoil the barrel if not detected in time.
There are many ways to reduce the chance of "being turned". The spy should reduce ones attachments or at least reduce the access to information about one's life, since they can be used to exert pressure, also, by not living shamefulness life that can be used to blackmail or in other ways compromise the spy.
The agency can only act preemptively on the selection of agents, grooming, monitor and check. This include spot checks of actions and performance, controlled dissemination of misinformation as to non-authorized sharing of information and by increasing loyalty factors and stakes. It is not by chance that traitors are often shoot.
A scam, is the art of using misdirection as to gain advantage over someone with the collaboration of one or more third participants that are kept unaware of the ultimate goal but are motivated by their own self interest. That are often kept in check by criminal or moral liability at the end of the process, when realizing their own uninformed implication in the affair.
Agents my be required to use this type of tactic to convince and motivate someone to work against their own best interests. More common in criminal activities this type of tactic is also used in many other contexts, even by police forces. A scam can have the secondary objectives of creating a fragility in loyalties even as to permit to establish control of a human asset trough blackmail/social coercion/exposure of liability.
A scam ultimately hinges on a combination of persuasion, misplaced trusts and self delusion, often motivated by greed.
This type of operations is extremely complex and time sensitive and is predicated in a very deep knowledge of human nature. In the operation those that define the plan are often called the brains. Even if this type of operations can fallow a preset configuration, they need be fluid enough to adapt to the specifics and be sufficiently robust to deal with rapid changes.
See the target(s) up with a lure or bait. This is done by setting up a motivator or the convincer. Consisting in starting the other parties in motion in accordance to the plan. The one placing a lead or leading is often called the roper, it does not only sets the operation in motion but will often intervene to keep those involved motivated, that is hooked.
This can be the function of a specif operator or a designed set of circumstances that permits the monitoring of the evolution of the plan and keeping at the same time those that are not aware of the process, distracted from any event that would permit a premature unveiling of the operation.
This is the end stage. It consists in terminating the action in a way that the targets are kept unaware of what transpired or put into a position that it is in their own self interest to keep silent.
The spy may be required to perform an assassination, that is to "take down", terminate, silence or retire someone.
Dry cleaning, is a response to a non-wet operation (wet meaning bloody). A dry cleaning is the removal of all traces of agent(s) presence on a possible crime scene or in a location that any adversary agency must not detect interference.
It constitutes in the removal of finger prints, DNA traces and other indications of physical presence at the location.
It can also be an indication to procedures to detect if one is under surveillance, but in that meaning the term has fallen in disuse.
Most agents are trained on how to perform at least basic interrogation. This includes how to handle non invasive psychology pressure points and trough observation of reactions read the subjects body language. There are also several mechanical or computational tools to ascertain state of mind and even a crude form of computer aided mind reading is possible today. Other more proactive forms do involve mental and physical torture.
Agents are not only trained on how to perform but how to resist interrogation. There is no way to avoid being coerced into providing information even one that is not valid or complete, the "game" most favored is to first negate, then provide partial truth mixed with some form of previous established setup that actions by the enemy on it will warn that one has been compromised, fallowed by endurance to the coercion as delaying effort to make the information as less useful as possible or to enable the agency to take engage any possible countermeasures.
Today most agents should have at least a crude understanding on how to read body language, from a nervous walk and suspicious behavior, to at least have indication if the target is cooperating and telling truth of lying.
This has all to do with perception of minute details and micro-expressions that are not easy to consciously replicate, one should be aware that body language accounts a great part of how we communicate, this is often disregarded, but something that is of crucial importance in an interrogation. It provided a line of obtaining important feedback.
Most body language falls into commonsense, something that most of us learn to read without a conscious effort, but at times without a full conscious understanding of the meaning. In is not only important to understand what you read but what you transmit, how the target perceives the interrogator is almost as important as what the interrogator can read from the target. Interrogation ultimately is a dialog, a mental contest.
The brain functions are mostly all located today in the brain's structure and general to all persons, and it is why and and how we known that eye movement normally fallows the increased activity on one side of the brain or the other.
Normal "tells" (indications), include shifting of eyes (indicating unease, nervousness). Eye contact indicates interest and attempt to empathize, if it last longer it can be interpreted as dominance assertion (and even threatening or an indicative of deception, depending on the setting) while eye contact avoidance indicates fear or recognition of dominance.