alexa

No more evasion—today, in a recording declassified from secrecy, a former IT specialist of the Tisza Party, H.D., personally admits to the Constitution Protection Office that he was recruited.

From the testimony, it turns out that:

  • the process began with a cyber training in Estonia, which turned out not to physically exist,
  • he took part in a mandatory trip to Kyiv, where he met contacts who looked like Ukrainian mobsters,
  • at first he was prepared for defensive actions, but later also for offensive operations;

The man admitted: “they pulled me in,” and it is clear that he was recruited for a later operation.

Therefore, the counterintelligence acted correctly when it intervened. The police officer, on the other hand, did not and could not know about all this.

For us, one thing matters: to protect Hungary’s peace and security!

Their cyber defense situation in Ukraine is not exactly outstanding, so I wanted to support them a bit, and also to collect donations for Ukraine. In this context, I carried out some volunteer activities—let me add that I never accepted any money for what I did. What I did was simply that we conducted defensive operations in Ukraine against Russian cyberattacks. We updated systems against cyberattacks by Russian hacker groups, installed and configured IDS and IPS systems, monitored and analyzed incoming network traffic, and improved the systems. Quite a few SCADA specialists didn’t really know their own systems, even though SCADA systems are quite frequently attacked, as far as I understand. And obviously, I’m not that knowledgeable about SCADA myself, but I wanted to somehow help the Ukrainian cause to defend their country.

🧠 Quick overview

👉 Main narrative:

  • “Tisza = Ukrainian infiltration / espionage”
  • “Ukraine = mafia + attack + manipulation”
  • “We = protection, security, counterintelligence”
  • “Election = security vs. betrayal”

👉 Hidden formula:

fear + appearance of “evidence” + enemy framing + legitimization
→ “there is a real threat → strong action is justified → only we can protect you”

🔍 Influence techniques

1️⃣ “Secret recording” = fake credibility framing

👉 Excerpt:
“declassified recording”, “admits it”

👉 Technique:

  • “secret”, “declassified”, “confession” → illusion of credibility
  • no source, no verifiability
  • one person → generalization

👉 Goal:
👉 make it seem like undeniable proof

👉 Effect:
👉 “if there’s a recording, it must be true” reflex

2️⃣ Single case → entire political camp (generalization)

👉 Excerpt:
“former IT specialist of the Tisza Party…”

👉 Technique:

  • one person → whole party
  • no proportion, no context

👉 Goal:
👉 build collective guilt

👉 Effect:
👉 “if one is like this, they all are”

3️⃣ Enemy demonization (enemy framing + dehumanization)

👉 Excerpt:
“Ukrainian mafia-looking handlers”

👉 Technique:

  • “mafia” = criminal, dangerous
  • judging based on appearance (visual trigger)

👉 Goal:
👉 emotional rejection, fear

👉 Effect:
👉 you don’t think → you reject

4️⃣ Gradual story-building (narrative arc)

👉 Excerpt:

  • “cyber training”
  • “trip to Kyiv”
  • “offensive operations”

👉 Technique:

  • step-by-step story → cinematic credibility
  • the more detailed → the more believable it feels

👉 Goal:
👉 create the feeling: “this is too detailed to be fake”

👉 Effect:
👉 reduced critical thinking

5️⃣ Defense → attack shift (threat escalation framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“initially defensive, later offensive actions”

👉 Technique:

  • morally acceptable → dangerous
  • gradual escalation

👉 Goal:
👉 increase perceived threat

👉 Effect:
👉 “this is no longer help, this is aggression”

6️⃣ “They sucked him in” = psychological authentication

👉 Excerpt:
“they sucked him in”

👉 Technique:

  • everyday language → human, relatable
  • informal tone → “honest confession” effect

👉 Goal:
👉 make the story feel more authentic

👉 Effect:
👉 easier identification

7️⃣ Justifying counterintelligence (authority legitimization)

👉 Excerpt:
“counterintelligence acted correctly”

👉 Technique:

  • retroactive justification of state action
  • preempting criticism

👉 Goal:
👉 legitimize measures

👉 Effect:
👉 “then it must have been necessary”

8️⃣ “The police didn’t know” = detaching responsibility

👉 Technique:

  • softening potential abuse
  • keeping the system “clean”

👉 Goal:
👉 avoid questioning execution

9️⃣ Security closing line (protector framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“we protect Hungary’s peace and security”

👉 Technique:

  • classic “we protect you” narrative

👉 Goal:
👉 emotional closure

👉 Effect:
👉 fear → relief → support

🔟 Technical detail injection (technical credibility trick)

👉 Excerpt:
“IDS, IPS, network traffic analysis”

👉 Technique:

  • technical jargon → increased credibility

👉 Goal:
👉 “this must be true because it sounds technical”

👉 Effect:
👉 non-experts can’t verify → accept it

⚠️ Why it feels “disgusting” (and why it’s typical)

This text:

➡️ does not aim to prove
➡️ aims to create an emotional state

Specifically:

  • too many strong claims
  • “secret evidence”
  • enemy + mafia + spies
  • detailed but unverifiable story
  • ends with “we will protect you”

👉 This is a classic:

👉 “fear campaign disguised as evidence”

🧩 Why they push it even if “people don’t believe it”?

This is the key:

👉 they don’t want to convince everyone

but to:

  • reinforce their own base
  • destabilize the uncertain
  • dominate the agenda

👉 propaganda logic:

“it’s not about whether it’s true
but whether it stays in people’s minds”