Please Post Suspected Disinfo Sites on This Thread

DISINFO SITES

www.prisonplanet.com
www.infowars.com
www.antiwar.com
www.abovetopsecret.com
www.erichufschmid.net
www.wingtv.net
www.whatreallyhappened.com
www.breakfornews.com
www.911truth.org
www.911proof.com
www.konformist.com
www.apfn.org
www.fair.org
www.tomflocco.com
www.oilempire.us
www.serendipity.li
www.rense.com

..and who could forget Project Scamelot?

Hell, it's horrible when you figure it out, but almost every well-known 'truth' site/forum/show is compromised. The movement is controlled by intelligence agencies (CIA) and military PsyOps personnel (Fort Bragg PSYOPS units, Strategic Communications Laboratories).

reply to post by Phage


LOL! I like the way you think. In order to fully and intelligently explain or attempt to explain anything conspiracy or not I think we need to consider not just 1 or 2 sides but all, weigh the sides and considered evidence and facts and come to an educated intelligent conclusion based on them. It seems to me you are that type of guy. You might seem a little skeptical maybe but from taking all sides I am led to believe less unless it is backed up by hard facts credited from reliable sources since people are willing to believe anything if it gives them purpose or something to do. There are a myriad of reasons people convince themselves to believe something regardless of the hard evidence. Take religion for example.....

I don't think people fully comprehend exactly what disinformation is. Hosting a website where you truly believe you are offering facts is not disinformation. A site that says chemtrails do not exist is hardly disinformation. Just because you don't agree with someone's opinions doesn't mean they are a disinformation agent. The number of times I've seen people accused (and myself three times now, which is funny stuff) of being a disinfo 'agent' makes me giggle a little.

When a vessel crashes at Roswell, and they say "we got a flying saucer!" but the following day we get "it's a balloon!" followed by two other stories... that is disinformation. Regardless if wasn't an alien ship (although I do think it was), it wasn't a weather balloon, so that is known disinformation.

Dr. Donald Menzel, if Majestic is the real deal, is a great example of a really really good disinfo agent at work.

A site that posts facts isn't disinformation. I think this thread is a bit off and wrong.... you are basically saying "here are the sites I don't like because they don't agree with what I believe in."

Originally posted by fleabit
I don't think people fully comprehend exactly what disinformation is. Hosting a website where you truly believe you are offering facts is not disinformation. A site that says chemtrails do not exist is hardly disinformation. Just because you don't agree with someone's opinions doesn't mean they are a disinformation agent. The number of times I've seen people accused (and myself three times now, which is funny stuff) of being a disinfo 'agent' makes me giggle a little.

When a vessel crashes at Roswell, and they say "we got a flying saucer!" but the following day we get "it's a balloon!" followed by two other stories... that is disinformation. Regardless if wasn't an alien ship (although I do think it was), it wasn't a weather balloon, so that is known disinformation.

Dr. Donald Menzel, if Majestic is the real deal, is a great example of a really really good disinfo agent at work.

A site that posts facts isn't disinformation. I think this thread is a bit off and wrong.... you are basically saying "here are the sites I don't like because they don't agree with what I believe in."

If someone actually denies the existence of Chemtrails, then chances are, they've got an agenda.

I think that this thread will not only be a viable source for possible disinformation websites, but also a clear representation of possible disinformation agents within this website.

reply to post by quetzalcoatl13




Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition !

Sounds like the Mods will be busy.

edit~Add quote~

[edit on 25-11-2008 by UmbraSumus]

reply to post by LordCarpainter


Sure, they obviously are dis-info agents.

What's the definition of "dis-info agent"? In conspiracism, it translates to "everybody opposing your point of view by debunking your claims with solid evidence". And if you can't deliver evidence yourself, I guess the man-in-black are responsible.

Sheeshh....

Every website is a disinfo agent to someone. It's kind of silly to try and bring every website on the web onto one thread, don't you think?

Lynch Mob!!!

I brought the rope





[edit on 11/25/2008 by Blaine91555]

[edit on 11/25/2008 by Blaine91555]

Originally posted by asmeone2
Here:

www.savethemales.ca

This site always did perplex me. I'm not sure what to make of it. He seems to have an interesting perspective on some things, yet he condemns feminism.

Originally posted by Phage
Yes, we are aware that using science (evidence and facts) against rumor and speculation is a bit unfair.

So-called experts misuse science all the time. I've personally seen more than one person's health frighteningly mishandled by doctors and other medical personnel. They would use their narrow textbook "science" to back up their bad decisions and their mistreatment of patients, while denying the patient's experiences of their own illnesses and knowledge of their own body.

I see a parallel between this kind of behavior, backed up by society's putting of "experts" on pedestals, and the kind of large-scale denial of subject matter on some of the websites in question. This is the kind of misuse of influence or media that can invalidate and silence people who need more attention and investigation into the phenomena they observe and question. Truth as determined by science is not static. To be closed to new truths is not scientific at all.


Maybe a subgroup of these sites could be called "invalidator" sites and not "disinformation" sites. That sounds more like what I think marsha law wants it to mean, and not a catchall term for any site that contradicts any given person's beliefs. We also have the "infiltrated truth movement" sites, where we have people who *think* they have the truth (beyond the official truth) but establishment agencies have allegedly infiltrated. (see below) There is also the well-known category of controlled opposition, of course, whose sole purpose is to discredit questioners. I would add to this a 4th category of sites with which we simply disagree - and that is not necessarily disinformation (Makow's site would be one on my list; that's just a personal list due to my own opinion, the way I see it).

Originally posted by LordCarpainter
Hell, it's horrible when you figure it out, but almost every well-known 'truth' site/forum/show is compromised. The movement is controlled by intelligence agencies (CIA) and military PsyOps personnel (Fort Bragg PSYOPS units, Strategic Communications Laboratories).

Are the movements controlled by intelligence agencies or just infiltrated and/or confused by them?


Finally, I would like to add 3 sites to the OP's list (with my twist on how I would label them in the light of the moderator's comments):

Skepdic and Quackwatch - They have invalidator tendencies, and I simply don't agree with a lot of the misleading or insufficient presentation of facts on them; in particular, they try to discredit some alternative health practices which I know to be effective or helpful. We can argue til the cows come home about whether Reiki or craniosacral or whatever works, but I don't like the way they ridicule therapies without always even making the effort to accurately or fairly describe them. They'll even have segments on there about a therapy with, say, one small group of students as a sample for their claims.

Natural Solutions Foundation - Some call it controlled opposition. There is some good information in there, but they conveniently leave out the globalist agenda's relation to Codex Alimentarius. If you get on the list, you will get urgent emails on a regular basis telling you there are only x number of days left to contact the FDA and get them to hear your pleas regarding Codex. You will get pacifying emails announcing every small "victory" in their supposed movement against Codex. It has been said that they divert attention away from real action toward the ends they promote, and onto their empty petitions which accomplish nothing but perhaps get you on some list. If this is about opinion, then mine is that I am not 100% sure whether the site is misleading or not. However, I've read enough to avoid the site, and I got off their list years ago.

[edit on 26-11-2008 by wintermarches]

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by thefreepatriot
Why not change the thread to please post disinfo sites and disinfo ats members.. that would be interesting...

No.

Lets not, because that would be ad-hominem attacks on ATS members and that is against the T&C.

Ummm i got attacked by a "debunker" recently he said i took lsd growing up for beleiving in chemtrails.. I can name this and a few other incidents.. it seems ATS is fostering an enviroment where this seems to be ok..? this is strange considering that this is in fact a conspiracy site... or so i tought?

www.MorgellonsWatch.com

Truly professionally paid de-bunker of Morgellons Disease; virtually all information is posted to sway the reader into believing Morgellons Disease is "all in the imagination"

reply to post by thefreepatriot


awww poor baby!
In that same thread you were defending someone who personally attacked me and my intelligence because of my avatar.

Pot meet kettle






*Mods: sorry this is off subject, I expect it to be removed but this user likes to make out he's hard done by or something when it's far from the case.

OK.

This thread has been the subject of discussion between the board staff and we feel that its not the ATS way, or in ATS's best interests, to have a thread dedicated to openly criticising other sites.

As such the thread is being closed pending further review.