How many board members ARE terrorists/propaganda agents?

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams (with adjustment by SO) Again, what I'm saying is that if someone is making up stories about how __________, let's say, _____ in ________ ... and, at the same time, their online identity is shaky... there's a good chance that they are simply churning out propaganda that has an agenda.

(blanks added to illustate a point) And how is this different than 99% of all "conspiracy theory" on the Internet? I think all you're seeing is the habitual nature of the typical conspiracy theorist. And well, we happen to be discussing this point on the largest Internet forum for such people. It's the nature of the beast. The only weapon, ever, is truth.

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
I think more Bush sycophants come across as terrorists than regular folk, especially the ones that defend the administration's criminality and who provide news of dozens of imminent domestic terrorist threats. That's terrorism at work.

Everyone is an agent of their own propaganda. Some are clumsy and comical. Some are better than others.

I second that. I also think bush and his administration are terrorists, many of the administrations previously in power in the states were. There have been FBI documents proving that the death of, the black panthers, and JFK was caused by there own national powers that be.

Originally posted by faddinglight

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
I think more Bush sycophants come across as terrorists than regular folk, especially the ones that defend the administration's criminality and who provide news of dozens of imminent domestic terrorist threats. That's terrorism at work.

I second that. I also think bush and his administration are terrorists

i third that. if you listen to JFK's inaugural speech, you can 'sense' that he was squarely pitting himself against the fascist shadow controllers.

if you can read the dictionary definitions of terrorism in my sig, you can see that terrorism can be a state sponsored activity, and is not the exclusive terrortory of fanatical 'lone gunman'.

Again... I am not saying that anyone who dislikes Bush is a terrorist. What I am saying is that it would make sense for terrorists to post on this board in disguise. Before everyone dismisses me as Joe McCarthy Jr... they should really think about that.

If you ran a terrorist cell... wouldn't you have an online propaganda wing? Ats has grown in readership... and it serves as a clearinghouse for conspiracy and weird news stories... so, if you were a terrorist and wanted to get the ball rolling on some demoralizing story wouldn't you post on ATS?

I feel that this thread does an injustice to people from other countries that US policies has alter in some way their own view of the world.

Now as for being a terrorist if you are against the government and its policies, I think that is our god given right in the constitution, is "we the people"

Not "we the government" so pointing out the errors and mistake of the administration in power is actually your right as a citizen of the US.

The day that you will not be able to express your opinion will be the day that our government would have become a dictatorship.

So onlyinmydreams you should be happy that so far we are a free and a Democratic country as of today.

[edit on 25-12-2004 by marg6043]

After reading the posts in this thread, I see that lots of people are asking, "I am against Bush. Does that make me a terrorist?"

Well, I am not against Bush. Does that make me a terrorist?

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
I think more Bush sycophants come across as terrorists than regular folk, especially the ones that defend the administration's criminality and who provide news of dozens of imminent domestic terrorist threats. That's terrorism at work.

I don't see many posts addressing MA's comments..?

The fact that I'm not against Bush does not mean that I am 100% behind him, either. Does that make me a 'Bush sycophant'? Am I 'defending the criminal elements of this administration'? Well, I have been accused of both by members of this board.

Usually, these labels are applied to me when I ask for proof of an allegation. "No proof can be given", I am told. "We just know it to be true. If proof were available then we would act upon it."

I just have to address this point before I go:

by MA
and who provide news of dozens of imminent domestic terrorist threats. That's terrorism at work.

Imminent domestic terror threats. Like, 'The constitution is being banned". Or "National drivers license standards are labeling us for herding into concentration camps". Do they count?

Gives new meaning to the phrase "You're either with us or against us", eh?

:shk:

Originally posted by marg6043
I feel that this thread does an injustice to people from other countries that US policies has alter in some way their own view of the world.

Now as for being a terrorist if you are against the government and its policies, I think that is our god given right in the constitution, is "we the people"

Not "we the government" so pointing out the errors and mistake of the administration in power is actually your right as a citizen of the US.

The day that you will not be able to express your opinion will be the day that our government would have become a dictatorship.

So onlyinmydreams you should be happy that so far we are a free and a Democratic country as of today.

[edit on 25-12-2004 by marg6043]

Again:
1.I never said that people should be censored on ats
2.I never said that anyone who was against Bush or the US government was a terrorist.

For the third or fourth time... what I DID say was that terrorists would want to use a place like ATS to start the ball rolling on rumors that could demoralize the us public. What I DID say was that some of the grossly anti-american stuff that you see on ATS smacks of enemy propaganda.

Now... note how everytime I've CLEARLY stated that I am not for censorship some members come out of the woodworks and give big speeches about free speech and all that. They would like you to think that I, even once, called for censorship... when, in fact, I've always only been pointing out that organized groups can play mind games on the net that are very similar to the 'Tokyo Rose' tactics of WW2.

Note, also, how certain people automatically assume that I am talking about THEM, specifically, when I say that many posts on ATS read like blanket anti-american propaganda. It's as if they KNOW that they are just blindly pushing anti-american stuff....

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Note, also, how certain people automatically assume that I am talking about THEM, specifically, when I say that many posts on ATS read like blanket anti-american propaganda. It's as if they KNOW that they are just blindly pushing anti-american stuff....

because people always 'project'. i think you need to re-read skeptic overlord's post. he was right(as usual). you fill in the blanks. anti-american, anti-islam, anti-aunty, ....whatever... it is your own personal biases that determine the 'morality' of others.

and, most importantly(to your understanding) is what the term 'anti-american' means. to many right-wingers it is synonymous with 'anti-bush'. to others(both right and left) bush himself is anti-american because he is shredding the constitution(you can include me in this group), among his other anti-american shortcomings(like illegal detainment of HUMANS).

anti-american has zero meaning, because the eye of the beholder fills in the blanks. for proper communication to occur, people need more precise terms. there are few terms that haven't been compromised by history and cultural growth.

we CAN clearly disagree or agree on simple things. is theft bad? is murder bad? is lying bad? is torture bad?
here are some slightly less simple questions.....
is giving ultimate power to unknown people who exercise it behind closed doors a good idea? or should ultimate responsibility go hand in hand with ultimate transparency?


[edit on 26-12-2004 by billybob]

ATS, itself may very well be a CIA operation. What better way to find out what the population knows, believes.. and who can figure out the facts between the disinfo..

How many board members ARE terrorists/propaganda agents?

Not many, if any, are actual terrorists, but there are terrorist sympathizers.

Is that the same as a propaganda agent?

Jso

You just raised an interesting legal point that relates to Patriot Act II.

I think the one major difference between propaganda agents and terrorist sympathizers is their associates. Propaganda agents, agents of a government or terrorist NGO, work towards a unified goal in concert with other elements of the terrorist's attack plan. They may even take orders from the highest echelons of the terrorist organization, since inteligence and counter-inteligence/misinformation are top priorities and often remain unknown to the rank and file. Terrorist sympathizers on the other hand would be a large, scattered, diverse and unconnected group of individuals, each pursuing different tactics towards different ends, though perhaps with the same theme. Their associates would not be terrorist leaders, but by and large 'normal folk' who pose no threat. The friends, neighbors, parents, and even spouse of a terrorist sympathizer might never recognize themselves as such; they could be completely ignorant of the other person's activities.

This poses an interesting question for domestic law enforcement utilizing FBI and CIA surveilance assets -- Where do you draw the line on guilty by association. Do you authorize inteligence assets to watch the suspected terrorist sympathizer only, or do you watch his friends as well after seeing them meet? Do you watch the parents, the friends of friends, neighbors, milk delivery man..

The point of this post is not to agitate in one direction or another, but to raise a serious question about the practicality of having surveilance without using it. In other words, if an agent of the inteligence services finds some irregularity in the US, and he's duty bound to investigate mind you, and ends up with an entire neighborhood on his hands, what do we do?

The same could be true of propaganda agents, but I think that surveilance in those cases would probably be meaningful to a larger degree. Is there a proper distinction made in the new laws? I don't know, nobody really knows, because the thing hasn't finished writing itself in the courts, if you know what I mean. There have been very few outwardly or loudly offensive uses of the Patriot Act so far. That doesn't mean it isn't possible, it just means the courts haven't seen enough special cases to work out the kinks. Any thoughts on the difference between propaganda agents and terrorist sympathizers in the context of legal terms?

Well I think you gave a good rough draft of the definitions of what makes one an agent vs a sympathizer. One could argue that all agents are sympathizers, but not all sympathizers are agents. Surveillance would be necessary in all cases to separate the two.

There are bound to be legal bumps in the road, for sure. I wouldn't be surprised to see entrapment used to prove a case.

A truly assenine thread

Typical of Bush followers...If we are not in love with Bush and his policies we must be terrorists. right

How silly.

BTW, Jsobecky, neither am i a "terrorist sympathizer" For the love of....

[edit on 26-12-2004 by dgtempe]

Originally posted by dgtempe

A truly assenine thread

Typical of Bush followers...If we are not in love with Bush and his policies we must be terrorists. right

How silly.

BTW, Jsobecky, neither am i a "terrorist sympathizer" For the love of....

[edit on 26-12-2004 by dgtempe]

Kind of conceited of you, isn't it, dg, to think that I was giving you the slimmest of consideration or thought?

Don't flatter yourself. You're not that important and you're certainly not interesting.

Just a broken record.

Jsobecky, you certainly crack me up. God bless you.

Originally posted by dgtempe

A truly assenine thread

Typical of Bush followers...If we are not in love with Bush and his policies we must be terrorists. right

How silly.

BTW, Jsobecky, neither am i a "terrorist sympathizer" For the love of....

[edit on 26-12-2004 by dgtempe]

Again... You've chosen to ignore my actual point. I understand that it makes you feel superior to think that I am saying what you claim that I am saying... but, in the future, you might want to take the time to read what the thread is actually about.

Otherwise... you actually paint YOURSELF as a classic 'kneejerk' when you give self-righteous commentary in regards to ideas you haven't even read.

Ok, onlyinmydreams,

Its not people in ATS that are a terrorist/proganda agents.

Why? because they have better things to do, like planning the next bombing than debating with the patriotic members in this board.

Yes, you may find the typical "wanna be" terrorists that like to inflame some around with their pro-islamic radical threads or post and links, but they are not terrorist by any mean.



[edit on 27-12-2004 by marg6043]

Obviously OIMD should have said Neo-Con or Christian conservative propagandists. Than the same usual suspects that weighed in with the disbelief routine would have weighed in with never-ending "grr those ignorant fools are ruining the country - I hate them too" routine. I must have ESP because just by reading initial posts in a thread I know who's going to reply and what they're going to say.

Sure, there are absolutely propagandists on boards like this (and I don't mean all of us with our personal agendas and beliefs). The Free Republic has them, Democratic Underground has them....a certain member here that came with a flourish and was ended abruptly seemed rather suspicious to not just me I'm sure. You'll never know.....that's why you don't trust most things on the net. Unless of course it's a crazy theory on some friggin Tripod or Geocities kind of site that says something you want to believe. Then it's gospel #ing truth. Although I'm guilty of that too sometimes...that's why I'm here.

How did any of you get anti-Bush = terrorist out of any of this?!? I want someone to tell us where those #ing synapses fired to get from the initial post to that conclusion.

Onlyinmydreams

I'm curious as to your opinion in regards to my earlier post -- the definition of terrorist sympathizer vs. enemy propaganda agent. Since you are the author of this post, I want to hear your feelings on the subject of legal definitions, and how our government should best act on knowledge that someone is colluding with the enemy one way or another.

I AM AN AMERICAN VETERAN! I laugh at anyone who bashes what America does because I have been to other countries and know what is truth. Response to this post after reading replies to it, I am ashamed to even read such mockery today. If you live in another country and voice your opinion about American policies, speak about your country for a change, please list for I do love to comment on your country politics. When a member puts on a thread that will deal with America in anyway, across the globe cultures have something to say about it. Granted this land has many problems, what about your country? Sick and tired of anti-american, what we do wrong it seams every time I turn around. Negative replies of those who just plain hate America, hate me as well! You do not know the silent majority in this country who believes in Freedom for all who seek it. They do not speak out for they know what course of action each will take without uttering a word. We just let those few say whatever in America, like Hollywood the path to the rich and famous! None at this present time can hold a candle to Bob Hope, John Wayne, Henery Fonda, or past actors who stood by troops. Veterans know who those people are in Hollywood who do not want any kind of war, but they do war movies and make money!! Wow! They laugh going to the bank when you leave the movie house. I do know their are stars surfing and maybe members.
Why worry about who may be watching, so let them for I am searching for the truth in people. We have forgotton ourselves so long ago that we keep dividing the human race because of what you have read and run with it. Ever hear of hear say of half wits passing on what they heard and it becomes bigger, and bigger, and bigger from the truth. You must understand that their is a gap between countries of beliefs, how we are taught, and tradition. Culture differences do lead to misunderstanding. It will begin with me far as to love my brothers and sisters in this world, even if they are my enemy. If the human race do stand side by side, would it be too late?
I can not control, nor want to control anyone, just to live without the negative atomosphere.

[edit on 6-1-2005 by ancientsailor]