A simple method to detect disinfo-agents

reply to post by Skyfloating


"You`re equipped with a failsafe method to find out who they are. As opposed to the hundreds of suspicion-based methods that do not work.

When they start harassing you in real life, you know the method worked. "

-----------------------------------

As a guy that sometimes comes off as a spiritual guru, that's a pretty insecure statement.

You have "hundreds" of suspicion based methods? Wow, talk about living in a life of constant doubt about yourself.

Why would you want the method's successful outcome to be someone "harassing you in real life"?

Why even let yourself become so stirred up?

This is a redundant thread, and I will certainly add to the redundancy. "JUST RELAX!! If there are agents here they have succeeded in getting you to live in a life of fear and suspicion.

Peace




[edit on 16-2-2009 by TheRealDonPedros]

reply to post by TheRealDonPedros


Its not that big of a deal really. Its just the observation that if you or anyone else for once has found out something of real political consequence, that thats a good way to see who is trying to oppose it. Its a good way to see if there is such a thing as disinfo-agents in the first place.

If someone one the other hand, has no information that is explosive, it will be almost impossible to learn something about the existence of deliberate disinfo-posters.

THATS the point I was attempting to make here. In no way shape or form am I trying to imply that this is happening all over the place or even often.



[edit on 16-2-2009 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Skyfloating


I feel that they are all over the place, we are one ourselves in effect. You don't ever know the truth, you just go through life learning a little bit more along the way.

By having all kinds of opinions it brings us further and further to the "elusive yet never reachable" truth.

I appreciate dis-info agents and I appreciate my own ability to act as a gatekeeper to the truth. Sometimes we who think "IM READY SHOW ME THE TRUTH" can't handle the truth. Its important that we have an individual and group filter in place or we would explode with the suddenness of it all.

Things happen for a reason. Timing is everything.

Peace

Originally posted by TheRealDonPedros

By having all kinds of opinions it brings us further and further to the "elusive yet never reachable" truth.

I appreciate dis-info agents and I appreciate my own ability to act as a gatekeeper to the truth. Sometimes we who think "IM READY SHOW ME THE TRUTH" can't handle the truth. Its important that we have an individual and group filter in place or we would explode with the suddenness of it all.

From a more "meta" level of understanding this is true. Thats not the level I was aiming for when making what you call a redundant OP, but its true nevertheless.

From that level anyone is an info- and disinfo-agent.

[edit on 16-2-2009 by Skyfloating]

This is all part of what I call Insecurity-Based Thinking (IBT) syndrome.

1. Idea theft. You explain something, next thing you know this is the other person's idea/experience. Borne from jealousy, mostly. Other types will try to shoot down your idea, also due to jealousy. If it's their idea, cool, otherwise forget it. This is quite pervasive. How long it takes before your idea surfaces as theirs varys in direct correlation to the ISB index.

2. A feeling that you are a sham, a facade. Lots of so-called 'experts' feel this. Some of them are right. Some them might even be posting on this thread

3. Self-delusion (mentioned earlier in this thread). Yes, we are our own disinfo agents. We cling to ideas that are borne from IBT. EST theory calls it 'playing (our) tapes'

4. A need to be 'saved' by a higher power. Aliens, religion, supreme being. Same-same. Also a corollary of IBT

5. Bandwagon riding. Jump onto the 'there be aliens in them thar hills' wagon. Be part of the group.

6. Inability to think for one's self. Sometimes it's laziness. Many of these types may be poor spellers.

So what might seem to be disinfo is just part of this syndrome.

-----
PS thinking about it I was pretty sure this would be on the Web. But Googling did not find it. I may have had an original idea. Woo-hoo.



[edit on 16/2/2009 by Syandos]

reply to post by thrashee


"Epic fail. But then, I'm a disinfo agent, so what does it matter?"

Welcome to the foe list.

I'm new enough to this field and ATS to get away with asking general questions - I hope.

I personally don't buy into the 9/11 Truthers position that the US govt or element of it planned and executed the destruction of the WTC, the attack on the Pentagon and the apparent attempt to hit the White House.

But I also strongly feel we don't have a clear picture of how much foreknowledge there was that an attack from foreign sources were going to happen in the way they did.

There is something often referred to as the 'official version' which combines government intelligence studies with accepted analysis of the cause of the WTC buildings' collapse, publicly available information on the international funding of the entire operation, and much more.

My question is - who and where is the consensus alternative version? What is the unofficial version' that tells us that in fact the US did not do everything within it's means to prevent the attacks on 9/11, that it is covering up relevant information.

My impression is there is no consistent accepted document or core group that has prepared something of significant weight and heft. A few books, a ton of blogs, a dozens radio shows, but what else?


Mike F

Originally posted by Skyfloating
You are misrepresenting the OP. If thats what the OP were about, it would indeed be retarted.

Maybe you missed the part of the OP where I say that labelling anyone who disagrees with you as a disinfo-agent is nonsensical.

I was hoping you would understand that I meant that as what your OP is logically concluding, not what you literally said.

Let's look at your OP:

3. Upon posting this in the Internet, those who wish to cover-up just that will start appearing in your discussion thread with the usual methods of denial, deflection and ridicule. If you were only posting a "possibility/theory" there would be no need for such strong denial. Those who do so are likely to know more about it than they admit.

This is where your logic fails. This is exactly where you are essentially stating, "if they rebuke your claims, they're likely a disinfo agent". This is entirely self-supporting logic.

Then you know who they are. If you want, check out some of their other internet activities to see if you can detect a pattern in their posting behavior.

No, you don't. You don't know squat, other than that they disagree with you. They could be perpetual skeptics or debunkers. They could just be cranky. Or maybe they just think the CT itself is hogwash. None of this is proof for anything.

See, the problem here is that you're using the tenuous logic that if you have "real" secrets and know your CT is "true", then anyone who disagrees with you is an agent. Whereas if you have no hard facts, these same people are probably just debunkers. The supposed truth of your CT cannot be used as proof that those who object are anything whatsoever.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I guess its ok to ask for a reasonable amount of evidence to support a given theory but these people fail to realize we are not discussing provable facts.

Of course you're not. No one ever discusses proven facts here (I wonder why). And yet somehow a new thread pops up every day claiming PROOF of alien existence, or of 9/11 conspiracies, etc. And yet when this happens, you claim:

We are on a conspiracy forumn discussing and advancing *possible* conspiracies. This means we need to relax our demands and take everything with a pinch of salt.

See the discrepancy here?

reply to post by thrashee

Originally posted by thrashee
No one ever discusses proven facts here

Oh yes there are people with proof here. But you won't find them easily.

Although I agree with the fact that many threads on ATS are misleading, or provide no evidence whatsoever to their claims. Pure Example

Skyfloating said

The Internet-Age is a disaster to those who wish to control the flow of information. Hence, disinfo-artists are needed.

So Sky the early internet was created by the government, later expanded by scientists---so why did 'THEY' create it or allow it to expand if they wanted to control information?

That is some interesting "Skyfloating logic" there!

reply to post by Hanslune


I don't think the object is necessarily to "control" the information in the way you are implicating it...

I've gone into this at length in other threads, so I'll just give a condensed version.
At some point, if you are perpetuating a cover-up, the internet begins to act on your behalf through web-browsers such as google. Why, you might ask? Because if you have kept a lid on the truth and confounded it with conjecture, half-truths, and ideas from far left field, these ideas begin to populate the web-browsers... Everything except for the "official" version.

Pretty soon, when I type "Alien Presence" into the google-bar, I get a littany of hoaxed videos that I have to wade through to find EVEN ONE that may be unexplainable.

And to answer your question, the internet was invented as a machination of war... Just like the rest of our technology. It is developed by the Military, or its contractors, and then passed into the private sector after the Government has learned everything about it and can utilize it in psyop activity in the civilian sector.


To simplify myself even further, the goal of the internet is not always to be forthcoming with information pertaining to national security. (or better yet, what they TELL US is national security... in fact, it is just stuff they want to hold over our heads for control)


[edit on 16-2-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply to post by Hanslune


Pay more attention Hans and look at exactly what I was saying. Did I mention the government? No. I said "Those who wish to control the flow of information".

Thanks to the internet, information is more free-flowing.

I understand you are eager to contradict me...but for that you will have to wait until I post something less obviously true

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The spooks on this website post all the time.
Why? Because just like most of us, they become "addicted"... They get caught up in their work.
This is a social network. Much like a REAL LIFE network, only we are somewhat anonymous.
Part of a disinfo agents job would be to make sure at least one or two of his/her personas have a very good reputation in here, as to seem credible.

I'll bet they even post when they are not at work. Just under a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT alias than they use, at any time, at work. Just to stay current, at all times.

This site is full of disinfo. And I don't mean the innocent type, I mean the deceivious type that RFBurns mentioned. I've got my suspicions of a few folks, but you'll never hear me voice them. I wouldn't like a libel charge.

On the other hand, I think that verified disinfo or hoaxes should be prosecuted under law, as they detract from serious research. Most of what the Government tries to cover up only serves their existance at their current status... One of perpetual war. If, at any time, someone were to show a way for peace to exist throughout this Planet, the NUMBER ONE adversary of that method would be the Defense Departments of various developed nations, Australia included.

If the US has disinformation agents on the net, you can bet your bottom dollar others do as well.

Speaking of Mr. Burns, I feel inclined to believe him. In fact, I called his department of employment in the LAST thread that he mentioned this on... It was that thread about the "manual" for disinfo agents.

All that being said, I'm surprised you started this thread, Skyfloating. The logical conclusion of this thread is a witch-hunt, like you touched on earlier.

As for Mr. Burns' suggestion of fingering disinfo, I'm not so sure it is reliable. I practice that method already (comes from my days in chat rooms)... Very quickly I realized what info to hold back and what to put forward. Or even more mischevious, when to make a flat-out claim I KNOW is bullsnap, while withholding good info... This is a way to quickly gain information from multiple sources in a medium such as this. I think a lot of this is just a bi-product of intelligent discourse. Just like that "manual" it is nothing more than a tutorial of the critiques of pure reason.
A professor will often employ the same techniques to gauge the comprehension of his students.

And as far as the claim that disinfo agents SIMPLY DO NOT EXIST ON THIS WEBSITE!

Maybe I misspoke about the Austrailian Government.

Disinfo *agents* or paid keyboard players are like moths to a flame.

Turn on the porchlight and they flutter around like fish outta water.

I find it amusing to say the least.

reply to post by Hanslune


Furthermore, the reason it was created, initially, was to produce a secure system of transmission of information... Why was it secure? Because THEY CREATED IT... Before that, people relied on radio signals. Electronic signals WAS a secure source.

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I guess its ok to ask for a reasonable amount of evidence to support a given theory but these people fail to realize we are not discussing provable facts.

Of course you're not. No one ever discusses proven facts here (I wonder why). And yet somehow a new thread pops up every day claiming PROOF of alien existence, or of 9/11 conspiracies, etc. And yet when this happens, you claim:

Anyone can claim anything they want but that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone will be convinced. Proof is what you make of the evidence!

We are on a conspiracy forumn discussing and advancing *possible* conspiracies. This means we need to relax our demands and take everything with a pinch of salt.

See the discrepancy here?


No, I don't! Am I stupid?

I star people i agree with,reply to people i dont agree with/agree with..thats about it,i could care less if there are disinfo agents on here which there probably are,but it doesn't effect my posting habits in anyway..so bleh who cares.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Howdy Sky

Did I mention the government? No. I said "Those who wish to control the flow of information".

So in your world the government ISN'T trying to control the flow of information? So that means private individuals or organizations are funding the disinfo agents? You talk about political information being covered up - I don't quite get your point then.

That the disinfo agents that plague you are not from the government - so where are they from then?