Federal government routinely hires internet trolls, shills to monitor chat rooms, disrupt arti

[amy31416]

amy, if you do read Sunstein's statements, you will see that you are confusing the issue. This thread is not about some effort of the government to find crime or criminals.

You haven't made your case very effectively, I don't even know what you're talking about and your posts weren't interesting enough to read, aside from the ones where you're upset that I'm not reading them.

I just put my kid to bed, I'm exhausted and had to spend time with in-laws today--I'm just not interested right now.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

Son of Liberty, huh?

Yeah, I'm a born-child of liberty.

Aren't you the guy I had to explain how just because I live within the boundaries of the claimed territory of the US government that I'm not to blame for what all it does?

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

Aren't you the guy I had to explain how just because I live within the boundaries of the claimed territory of the US government that I'm not to blame for what all it does?

No. You either have me confused with someone else, or you are remembering wrong.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

You haven't made your case very effectively, I don't even know what you're talking about and your posts weren't interesting enough to read, aside from the ones where you're upset that I'm not reading them.

I just put my kid to bed, I'm exhausted and had to spend time with in-laws today--I'm just not interested right now.

You haven't read my posts but somehow you conclude that my case is ineffective. That's kind of flattering.

I'm not actually upset by your ignorance of Sunstein's statements:

Sunstein's statements show that the government does not measure threat-level in terms of "hints at violence" alone. Specifically, Sunstein advocates the active suppression of:

• skepticism about the government’s assertions;
• beliefs that "hamper political support for measures against future terrorist attacks"; and
• the belief that the ruling regime is violating the constitution.

Our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that... believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice....

Within a network whose members believe that the federal government, say, is a hostile and morally repellent organization that is taking over the country, akin to a foreign invader, armed resistance will seem a sensible course to at least some fraction of the believers. In other, perhaps more common, cases the conspiracy theory will be of a different nature and will not directly indicate such action. However, such theories can still have pernicious effects from the government’s point of view, either by inducing unjustifiably widespread public skepticism about the government’s assertions, or by dampening public mobilization and participation in government-led efforts, or both. The widespread belief that U.S. officials knowingly allowed 9/11 to happen or even brought it about may have hampered the government’s efforts to mobilize social resources and political support for measures against future terrorist attacks. In the nature of things it is hard to find evidence for, or against, such possibilities; yet it hardly seems sensible to say that because such evidence is lacking, government should do nothing about a potentially harmful conspiracy theory. That precept would be paralyzing....

Cognitive infiltration...

Government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories, arguments and rhetoric....

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1084585

More like I am just noting that your opinion is based in an admitted ignorance of the evidence.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Ah, you're saying the military could be planning on changing the content of Wikipedia to its liking?

"Wikipedia" is edited by anyone and everyone. The site itself acknowledged a couple of years ago that one in every seven edits is vandalism. Kids have fun with this the way we made prank phone calls.

I did an experiment placing bogus information on wikipedia articles. It was absolutely no surprise to see that some of the baloney stayed on there for months. I have no reason to think the bogus crap ever got removed because people moved on to the next big thing.

Some people used to be so gullible that they would believe anything they read in a newspaper. Some people are still gullible. The only thing that has changed is the medium.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/leftist-trolls-in-ongoing-war-with-wnd/

http://darkhorsenet.wordpress.com/2...manipulation-and-the-common-and-garden-troll/
I provide this information only to reinforce and warn that WikiLeaks Forum has been completely, as Christine Assange has stated, “infiltrated”.

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-m...da-using-up-to-10-online-personas-each_062013
http://webabuser.blogspot.com/2013/06/internet-trolls-wars-us-military-thugs.html
The online personalities, known as “sock puppets”, will allow the military to “create a false consensus in online conversations, crowd out unwelcome
opinions and smother commentaries or reports that do not correspond with its own objectives.”

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread932095/pg1

http://consciouslifenews.com/cia-me...on-mockingbird-legal-internet-trolls/1147665/
Last year it was confirmed that the U.S. Military has been manipulating social media by using fake identities to influence conversations
and spread pro-American propaganda.
It’s called “Online Persona Management Services.”
Under the Centcom contract, it allows the creation of up to 10 fake online persona’s, known as “sock puppets,”
for every service man or woman working on the program.

According to Centcom, their only objective is to counter extremists and enemy propaganda outside of the U.S.,
saying that it would be unlawful to address U.S. audiences.

However, the 2013 version of the NDAA included an amendment that legalized domestic deceptive propaganda.
The new law allows the U.S government to legally carry out misinformation campaigns against U.S. citizens.


Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas
to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda.


http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5
The newest version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes an amendment that would
legalize the use of propaganda on the American public, reports Michael Hastings of BuzzFeed.

If the NDAA goes into effect in its current form, the State Department and Pentagon can go beyond manipulating mainstream media outlets
and directly disseminate campaigns of misinformation to the U.S. public.

You got anything else besides nonsense written by housewives working at home for extra income?

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I didn't read that stuff. I'm trying to find as many links as I can to this material. It's very possible that some of those things in those articles are wrong. I didn't right them. I'm not claiming that those articles are 100% accurate. At all. Just relevant to this conversation.

So your relevance is a bunch of stuff of which you don't even know the content.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Huh?

You put your Reddit thread in Politics and it was moved to Science and Technology.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

"During the campaign right up until the RNC, and shortly after it, you used the Maine GOP as THE example everyone should have followed because they "did what they were told by the campaign"."

You are correct. I am disillusioned about this. There clearly was a failure. I would be interested to know where to point the finger of blame. Brakey and/or the National Campaign. Willis was not properly vetted. Brakey isn't necessarily going to know to look out for things like INSCOM/NSA on a resume, but the National Campaign should. So, Brakey is somewhat to blame for putting up a bad candidate and the National Campaign is somewhat to blame for not rejecting the bad candidate.
I am not pleased.

"Did you only recently discover Mark Willis' past occupation?"

Yes. About a month ago. When he quit, writing an article where it said, explicitly, former "counterintelligence" in his bio. Bangor Daily News.

This is not to say that this information just became available. I have no idea when this information became available. There's at least some degree of trust that the people who are tasked by the campaign will try to avoid giving prime jobs to people who worked for INSCOM/NSA. In terms of getting Mark Willis elected, the 1118 were handed a list of people to vote for on that day in Augusta in May.

"Have you attempted to discuss it with him?"

No. I've never interacted w/ him. His wife, Violet, I've communicated with online, facebook, message boards, and she's difficult. I saw red flags with her as early as the Washington Co. Caucus.

You mean wikipedia or those "blogs" didn't have the answer?

 

[MelissaWV]

I'm not sure how this is news. This has been going on since the very beginning of the internet.

 

[Danke]

I just put my kid to bed, I'm exhausted and had to spend time with in-laws today--I'm just not interested right now.

How is Kludge these days?

 

[dannno]

Amy, the government likes enemies of the state who commit crimes against them that they can prosecute for because they can posture up and put a lot of ideological propaganda out there, I'm not sure why you think the government has much interest in 'stopping' them, they generally try and provoke them and then control the situation..

But the point bdtf is making is that they are in an ideological battle, not a criminal battle, that is why they have people here. Maybe not a lot, all the time, but I imagine there are at least a couple semi-regulars and then when you have events like Boston Bombing or a lead up to Syria, more come out of the woodworks.

 

[revned]

Ahem, Doug Wead.

He was a shill for the Bush campaign back when Bush was running for office. What kind of shill, I do not know, but he claims to have been a shill nonetheless.

Yeah, there are no such thing as shills. Pay no mind to the ever increasing encroachments of our liberty and how dangerously close we are to a second revolution. Government would never hire people to try and sway public opinion to ensure that they keep their control over a failing system of government. COINTELPRO and Operation Mockingbird were only legitimately implemented to stir up a hornet nest of conspiracy theories. Yeah... that sounds about right.

 

[parocks]

If you do read Sunstein's statements, you will see that you are confusing the issue. This thread is not about some effort of the government to find crime or criminals.

Right. I find it interesting that some people are missing this, or pretending to miss this.

 

[parocks]

You mean wikipedia or those "blogs" didn't have the answer?

I have no idea when Willis got a wiki page. I have no idea what Willis told Brakey the first time he met him. Did he say "I was a spy for INSCOM and the NSA for 10 years, I should be National Committeeman." At some point I was aware that he worked for the military in some capacity. Working for the Military isn't a red flag. I can imagine a number of soldiers who would fight in wars might prefer a candidate who wanted fewer wars. However, someone who is part of the humongous spy apparatus in the DC area would not want to see someone who wanted to slash his employers budget elected. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[parocks]

So your relevance is a bunch of stuff of which you don't even know the content.

I know it's on point. It's hard to find things on point.

You do know, right, that people post links to things they agree with. And disagree with. And that's always been the case. I'm posting relevant links. They're on the right topic. I'm not vouching for their accuracy. You can decide for yourself.

 

[amy31416]

How is Kludge these days?

Still breathing.

 

[amy31416]

Amy, the government likes enemies of the state who commit crimes against them that they can prosecute for because they can posture up and put a lot of ideological propaganda out there, I'm not sure why you think the government has much interest in 'stopping' them, they generally try and provoke them and then control the situation..

But the point bdtf is making is that they are in an ideological battle, not a criminal battle, that is why they have people here. Maybe not a lot, all the time, but I imagine there are at least a couple semi-regulars and then when you have events like Boston Bombing or a lead up to Syria, more come out of the woodworks.

I said my piece, I won't be nagged into it further. I created a reading and counting curriculum for my 2+ year old and she's started reading within just a couple weeks, I think that's more important.

(yeah, i'm bragging.)

 

[Deborah K]

I felt disturbance in the force and it led me here.

WTF people? Pages of trolling accusations and my name is not mentioned one single time?

OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!
OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! OBEY!

 

[dannno]

Back in the 60s and 70s it was documented that the CIA would infiltrate small peaceful organizations and try to get them to do violent things. These were groups of like 20 or 30 people.

There are thousands of visitors here every day and we had a huge community during the elections. Some people here are preparing to defend themselves during a possible civil war. There is no way in hell this place is empty of feds, that is just completely preposterous.