Abstract

Krzyszt of Michalski's response to my exposure of the corrupt management of his institute is based on three classical techniques of disinformation: 1) He provides irrelevant information to confuse the reader and create the impression that his conclusions are factually based. In fact, he withholds the relevant information and does not address the issues. 2) He misrepresents the accusations made against the IWM's corrupt practices in order to appear to refute them. Michalski argues against accusation X that was never made, but wants readers to have the impression that he has successfully argued against accusation Y, which is actually true. Michalski's response argues against accusations that were never made but avoids addressing real issues.