Disinformationists....where?

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Mhhmoo!

Schooby shnacks!

*turns into a ferocious biscuit eating monster, and bites your arm off*

p.s; i haven't a clue why he isn't giving you a direct answer, irritating isn't it?

The number of times i've backed intellectual adversaries into the corner only to have numerous distractive posts appear from nowhere is startling*.


[edit on 13-4-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]

*I hesitate to add, a tad predictable.

reply to post by Anti-Tyrant


Yeah it is irritating

Its funny to see that the majority of members that call the "disnfo" or "government" labels when they are challenged haven't even had a go at this thread yet

I wonder why eh...lol

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Well, don't forget that it doesn't mean we can instantly accuse him of being a disinfo agent - he might after all be acting under his own devices.

Kinda like what i was doing by playing devil's advocate.

Still, at least i tell people what i'm doing as i'm doing it.

reply to post by OzWeatherman


There's definitely some disinfo specialists on here of the "I'm irrational and non objective type". Foreign operatives most likely make use of ATS far more than any US personnel. A number of bizarre or irrational posts at times remind me quite abit of some Hezbollah or Al Qaeda type disinfo. Some of it is clear cut Black Propaganda( which has nothing to do with African Americans), while other disinfo is extremely biased irrational Anti American or Anti Semite crap.

article on Black Propaganda: en.wikipedia.org...

I can assure you the US government monitors ATS, but they are far from the biggest disinfo/propaganda -memetic engineers operating here.

The biggest ones on here are easily New Age Cults and White Supremacists/Anti Zionist groups. Agendas are pushed and ideas are sold without any evidence or support.

I wont throw around names out of respect for others but ive seen with my own eyes that theres are at least a couple of disinfo's here (you never know you may even find some on peoples enemy lists but ive also seen that people exaggerate the how many their are and throw accusations at people incorrectly so i agree its gotten out of hand. many of the people accused of being disinfo's are just ignorant with no desire to listen to reason and grow their mind any further and as a result come across to others as an intentional ignorance spreader when in fact they suffer from their own ignorance as well.

reply to post by HuntaXX


I wouldn't advise hunting people down and accusing them of being disinfo agents based purely on enemy lists, considering that isn't the point of the lists in the first place.

There is infact a quite simple way of deflecting disinfo - it's called using your own intelligence and reasoning to decide for yourself.

An experienced internet user will spot a post that lacks credibility from a mile off, and as such attribute the according respect to it.

Obviously, if the post is nothing more than a few lines of accusations or general acknowledgements, not much will be thought of it.

However, if the post is 'chock-a-block' with intellectual reasoning, then some may find it worthwhile to take that post into consideration.

The idea is not to look at one or two peices of information and decide from that, but to disseminate the facts available, and if you cannot come to a decision, or if it is unclear as to which side of the discussion you feel is more realistic, then the poster can feel free to ask questions, or in otherwords - probe further.

An intelligent question is worth a thousand answers, i believe is what i'm trying to say.

It is acknowledged that if a disinfo agent were to sit down in front of you, and have a one-on-one conversation with you attempting to dissuade you towards his agenda, more often than not the agent will fail purely because he has no backup.

You'll find that as you go along, and when you question certain articles being presented as evidence, all of a sudden someone will come along and bring up more evidence.

It's up to the individual as to whether or not he or she chooses to read through the new evidence, or ask whether or not the topic is being approached in a logical fashion befitting a realistic approach to the discussion.

There are people on the internet who - upon being confronted by such a reasonable and calm approach - churn out article after article 'supporting' their case, instead of deliberating with the other member on the point they're trying to make.

This is a classic sign of an individual trying to sway people to his viewpoint, instead of trying to find out the truth.

I think a disinfoagent is just someone who's uniformed about the subject. He has no info and has to make stuff up. but who are we kidding right? this is ATS and most of the threads are about stuff no one has any idea about. Aliens, UFO's, 911. etc. For the record i'm NOT A DIA.

reply to post by Anti-Tyrant


I think you misunderstood what i meant. i was saying that while i don't want to name names in this topic out of respect for the fact that most moderators ive seen so far frown upon it you may be able to find some disinfo agents by simply looking at who has added some of the biggest truth spreaders to their foes list

Originally posted by HuntaXX
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant

 

I think you misunderstood what i meant. i was saying that while i don't want to name names in this topic out of respect for the fact that most moderators ive seen so far frown upon it you may be able to find some disinfo agents by simply looking at who has added some of the biggest truth spreaders to their foes list

Oh I see, in the last 8 hours I 4 people added to their foe list. So they could be the DIA agents. makes sense. thanks for the info. I have to log off now. Be back tonite.

I think it is quite possible that some of the members at ATS are disinfo agents, but I am not entirely convinced of it. I have read many rude, nasty and just plain ignorant comments at this site in different threads, but to me it seems that some people here simply lack the ability to take a deep breath and count to ten before they post a comment or an answer.

I understand perfectly well that it is easy to lose your patience in a discussion, but you know, when someone gets you so mad that you end up looking like a two year old with a tantrum, you really have lost. You end up looking like a idiot, and people will remember your childish tantrum the next time they see your name and avatar in a thread.

I guess I just want to give the good old advice: Count to ten. Take a deep breath or leave your PC for a while before you post a comment or reply to someone you deeply disagree with. Remember that this person also has a right to his or her opinon, no matter how crazy or stupid it may appear to you.

All the best to you all from Ziggystar60.



[edit on 13-4-2008 by ziggystar60]

I believe you people are missing the point. It's not possible to prove one is a dis-info agent or not (unless you actually know the guy because he sits in the same office as you do ). There is simply not enough information available to make either conclusion.

Check Formal Logic (as a branch of mathematics), and you'll see you need enough axioms (or "truths"), and a valid set of rules to prove something. Neither can be found on online forums, thus the conclusion - it can't be proved either way.
[this works for UFO subjects as well, so pay attention to the morale of this little story]

What is important to know is that all modern secret services gather information any way they can. From simple, old-fashion spying to data mining of targeted online sites (online forums contain such richness of information you wouldn't believe it).

However, those collecting data are almost certainly not posting on online forums. It's not their job, and they would spoil the data they are collecting by interfering with the "natural" (unaffected) flow of information.

Nobody serious enough out there cares what you people say or don't say. You are too small fishes to even be bothered with... unless you hit a really, really sour spot, in which case you become a target for data collection yourselves. As an example, I will again mention B-1 catching fire and exploding in Qatar last week, for no apparent reason, and out of the blue! That kind of information will certainly make you a target for those who are important in this story. Try digging some info about that particular event. See if you can find anything... if you dare.

On a different note, I must say that I can easily imagine ATS (and similar online forums) as training grounds for counter-intelligence agents from countries all over the world (U.S. doesn't have exclusive rights to Internet, you know).

Now, don't get all jumpy and accuse me of being counter-intelligence agent myself. I am not... but then again, you can't prove that I am, can you?

Even though I spoke the truth about everything I've said here, and elsewhere, people are so used to be lied to that they will not believe it. Do you see what is happening now? You are being told the truth and you are taking it for a lie, thus making yourselves completely unable to distinguish between them.

Forget the words, forget the names. Go by your instincts. They are telling you the truth more often than your reason. This is coming from personal experience, so take it or leave it. It's your choice.

[edit on 13-4-2008 by elendal]

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by OzWeatherman

 

There's definitely some disinfo specialists on here of the "I'm irrational and non objective type"...

I can assure you the US government monitors ATS, but they are far from the biggest disinfo/propaganda -memetic engineers operating here...

The biggest ones on here are easily New Age Cults and White Supremacists/Anti Zionist groups. Agendas are pushed and ideas are sold without any evidence or support.

"Memetic engineers" is the key here.

I can get beind Mike's analysis. It's not so much that these people are spreading false information or obfuscating the truth as they are DRIVING AN AGENDA. Often, controlling the conversation is just as powerful, if not more so, than denying claims or lying about a topic.

Snippits of information, innuendo and emotive language can be very powerful in shaping opinion within a group setting. Make no mistake, it is happening. Every person on here has an agenda, some more specific and purposeful than others. Some are probably paid and some are just zealots for a cause.

Will I name names? No. Not because I am scared, but because I don't have enough information thanks to the anonymous world of the internet. But I do have my suspicions and I have learned to filter out the ignorant tripe from these individuals.

To think that there is not at least a small organized effort to direct or control opinion, conversation and emotions on ATS is just naive.

reply to post by ziggystar60


*counts to ten*

Believe it or not, i'm more inclined to believe that the members who do have temper tantrums are less likely to be disinfo agents.

How exactly would an agent stand to benefit from such behaviour, one wonders?

Something just occured to me that seems a tad important to mention;

There is not just one type of subversion that an organisation can induce into ATS, after all - it is quite possible for them to take the words of others on this very site and twist them to their own ends, for the purpose of nothing other than to apply continuity and therefore acheive a buildup of general response among users.

A successful attempt at disinfo will strengthen their cause, in otherwords.

One shudders to think about all the threads gone unnoticed by the moderators not only on this forum but on others because they are 'seemingly' harmless, but are infact generated by so-called 'Agents' in order to garner support as respected members of the community.

As such, if the mods were indeed capable of halting disinfo entirely on this forum, they would still have to deal with disinfo coming from others.

Diabolically, is the idea that ordinary members whom possess no real attachment to any establishment, could infact be used by agents in order to support or backup their attempts at disinfo.

What we are talking about is not a 'war' against disinformation, but something akin to a security protocol.

It could be compared to a virus on the internet, a plague on 'Truth'.

I am fearful of those who believe they are acting out of righteousness, for such passionate idealism is something that causes one to question their own conviction before stamping it out.

And of course, once one begins to question his convictions, one realises that a conviction is really exactly the same as having faith in something.

In this case, having faith that one 'knows' the truth.

They don't even need agents so long as little teenage kidiots are willing to make a mockery of others, purely to get kicks - what they do is simply spread the lies among those who would listen, and appreciate their input.

*sighs*

If only everyone would simply look before they leapt...

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
reply to post by ziggystar60

 

*counts to ten*

One shudders to think about all the threads gone unnoticed by the moderators not only on this forum but on others because they are 'seemingly' harmless, but are infact generated by so-called 'Agents' in order to garner support as respected members of the community.

Hi, I think you make some good points in your reply to me, and I was just wondering, do you have any excamples of these seemingly harmless threads? I am not trying to start an argument here, I am genuinly interested. Perhaps I have been far too naive about ATS?

Best regards, Ziggystar60.

Originally posted by jedimiller

Originally posted by HuntaXX
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant

 

I think you misunderstood what i meant. i was saying that while i don't want to name names in this topic out of respect for the fact that most moderators ive seen so far frown upon it you may be able to find some disinfo agents by simply looking at who has added some of the biggest truth spreaders to their foes list

Oh I see, in the last 8 hours I 4 people added to their foe list. So they could be the DIA agents. makes sense. thanks for the info. I have to log off now. Be back tonite.

im unsure if your being sarcastic or not there

[edit on 13-4-2008 by HuntaXX]

reply to post by ziggystar60


You know what, i prepared a somewhat epic post for you just now and my cable operator cut out again.



I'll try again;

*recollects thoughts on the matter*

Well, it's quite difficult to simply point out a seemingly 'harmless' thread due to the nature of the subversive action, they are after all going to quite some length to disguise their movements.

Where was i @ this point?

Ah yes;

The motivations of a disinfo agent on this matter is simple - to generate rapport with members of the website, thereby providing them with a certain degree of security where anti-subversion is concerned.

The ultimate goal of this is to create a schism among the membership demographic, this is easier if there are more than one disinfo agents working together - HOWEVER, it is quite unlikely that these agents will acknowledge one another's existence willingly, perhaps even going to the extent of which they would accuse one another of being disinfo agents.

An extremity, which pulled off correctly, will leave the average member befuddled as to what is really going on.

I believe at this point i started blathering on about battlefield tactics such as 'swarming', drawing comparisions to how on d-day the allies dropped in men behind enemy lines and even though they were disorganised they managed to sow chaos and discord among the german supply lines, thereby providing the main force a chance at a successful landing without the threat of an absolute defeat.

Then i went on to comment on how battlefield tactics can be quite readily converted to insurgency tactics, in the case of disinformation - the agents would work alone, amassing rapport with the users until one day a signal is given, and tshtf.

*attempts to recall how the post was ended*

Ah! of course, i made a point on the behaviour of members.

As i stated before, i consider it unlikely that a disinformation agent would go to the extent of acting like a big baby, throwing a temper tantrum @ other members based on one vice or another.

Indeed, those that occasionally break the rules are often the most sane and level-headed members of society, if only because they acknowledge that there are some circumstances in which the rules need to be broken in order to acheive what they see as finality over an issue.

If there was a book on internet surveillence, i imagine that there would be a point on this somewhere, as a member who consistently garners rapport with other users without falling out of favour with them would be a highly suspicious individual, if only because his personality does not seem capable of such charismatic progress.

This post is so different from what i originally wanted to post it's not even funny.



*Copies text just incase it happens again as i hit the 'post reply' button, and i lose everything i've typed*

I forgot to mention this in my original post as well as the one i just made;

If 'swarming' is indeed occuring, then there would have to be a pre-defined common sign amongst the agents involved - something simple like each of them posting a thread with the word "Banana" in it (something to do with a 'banana' republic, perhaps?) or each of them posting at a particular time of day.

There could also be a 'trigger' mechanism, whereby the agents would start acting aggressively subversive when a certain thread was made.

In a sense, this could all be compared to how a NEW WORLD ORDER would be started, at least where the death-squads are concerned.

reply to post by Anti-Tyrant


Hi again, thank you for your answer. I don't agree with you in everything you wrote, but I certainly respect your opinions. I just hope you don't think I am a disinfo agent because I try to avoid tantrums in this forum... Just kidding! Anyway, it has been interesting to read your comments, you have given me some new input on this subject.

Best regards, Ziggystar60.