It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Most Dangerous People on the Internet in 2016

page: 1
20
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I'm so sick of every publication deciding they need to be political.

From WIRED STAFF:




Vladimir Putin

Donald Trump

Steve Bannon

James Comey

ISIS

Milo Yiannopoulos

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

Julian Assange

Peter Thiel

Link.



Lame.


edit on 26-12-2016 by loam because: (no reason given)



+3 more 
posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Hash tag, FAKE NEWS???? roflmao


It is going to be a looooooooong 8 years for those who aren't used to not getting their way!



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   
What a strange list. I'll admit I had to look up Peter Thiel.

Before an anti-adblock thing popped up I read through a few of them. Seems their descriptions are full of half truths and lies. Not sure what I expected though.

No wired, I will not add your website to my list of unblocked sites. I don't want to support your self-declared "journalism".



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963


May as well add xuenchen to the list then lol.




posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   

the cybersecurity and US intelligence community’s consensus has only grown: Russia is using the internet to screw with America’s electoral politics.


Remind me again WHO was behind Flame and Stuxnet ?

Rather ODD BHO's name is left off that list.

Ok people it's not really odd.

Just shows Wired is just a political hack site.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: seeker1963


May as well add xuenchen to the list then lol.



Well how about you too? Biased is biased right?

Besides, those posting "OPINIONS" on ATS, does not qualify one as the media?
edit on 26-12-2016 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: loam
LOL, is that supposed to be in order?
If so Trump is going to have to work harder...he is only second and we know he is a winner!

Oh, and the Director of the FBI?!?! Guess he isn't the puppet they thought he was! Ha!



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: seeker1963


May as well add xuenchen to the list then lol.



Xeun should win a Pulitzer.

More of a journalist than main stream are.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I recognize very few of these names, but where are all the dangerous people from our existing establishment?

Where's that asshat who made propaganda legal in the US? He should be #1 on that list.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

How they factor the Islamic State into the same list as Milo, Trump, & Assange is beyond comprehensible.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, & the Islamic State are responsible for actual deaths of innocent people both here and abroad.

So far the only things Trump, Milo, & Assange are guilty of doing on the internet is speaking or revealing truths and being persecuted for it by the left.


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Look at the bright side.

Someone thinks the US president is a dangerous man. Contrast that with the past eight years where NO ONE in the whole world thought Obama was dangerous at all.

A dangerous man has someone's respect.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Our own Crunky did not make the list???




posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:44 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Two gay men who do not fit the progressive's narrow bigoted stereotype!

Ahhhhhhhhhhh! Danger! Danger!



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963


It is going to be a looooooooong 8 years for those who aren't used to not getting their way!



Yeah, you'd be amazed at what you can prove by using someone else's tantrums against them.

Putin and Erdoğan are world leaders so I don't think that makes them dangerous on the internet because they have the resources to have some folks show up at your house in the middle of the night, or where you eat lunch and have you taken out.

I don't think it's I who needs to get out more....



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

The article title doesn't even makes sense!
What exactly is WIRED implying?
Putin and Trump are master hackers?
Milo Yiannopoulos being on the list is very telling.

I'd suspect the most dangerous people on the net would be groups like the one that brought us STUXNET... A joint American/Israeli cyber weapon.

They got ISIS right.
Here is how my list would go.
CIA
ISIS
DOD
Bureau 121(might even deserve the #1 spot in terms of catastrophic danger to the average western citizen)
MOSSAD
MSS(Chinese intelligence)

NOT someone tweeting at 3:30 am from his penthouse.



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: gpols
a reply to: seeker1963


It is going to be a looooooooong 8 years for those who aren't used to not getting their way!



Yeah, you'd be amazed at what you can prove by using someone else's tantrums against them.

Putin and Erdoğan are world leaders so I don't think that makes them dangerous on the internet because they have the resources to have some folks show up at your house in the middle of the night, or where you eat lunch and have you taken out.

I don't think it's I who needs to get out more....


Yea, probably just about is much as I can take someone else's opinion on the internet as the truth? I suppose you support the whole suppression of information on the internet disguised by the globalists as fake news? BTW, I guess it flew over your head, when I mentioned fake news. When I say fake news, I mean news coming from the establishment that is radicalizing those who believe in it to the point of doing things similar to those in Nazi Germany?

Don't worry, I will still laugh whether it offends you or not!



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963


Yea, probably just about is much as I can take someone else's opinion on the internet as the truth?


I guess you can't believe anything on the internet or in life for that matter. Maybe nothing that you see either.


I suppose you support the whole suppression of information on the internet disguised by the globalists as fake news?


I suppose you support the opinions of other as long as they agree with your world view?


BTW, I guess it flew over your head, when I mentioned fake news. When I say fake news, I mean news coming from the establishment that is radicalizing those who believe in it to the point of doing things similar to those in Nazi Germany?


So do you mean all news in general that has a bias to polarize their base?


Don't worry, I will still laugh whether it offends you or not!


Don't worry. I'll be the one laughing all the way to the bank?



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAY1980
a reply to: loam

The article title doesn't even makes sense!


No it doesn't.

Moreover, it exposes the FAKE news narrative for what it is....fake...meaning it can come from anywhere and seems to be an accusation often leveled by the biggest purveyors of it.

Thiel is on the list for nothing more than funding a lawsuit that resulted in a $140m judgement against Gawker for it's predatory publication of a Hulk Hogan sex tape. Wired calls that a threat to free speech. Apparently, they're all in on the revenge porn movement and call that journalism.




Gawker has argued that Hogan made his sex life a public matter. But Hogan, whose legal name is Terry Bollea, told jurors he still suffers from humiliation following the tape's release, when he took the stand at the trial near his home in St. Petersburg last week.

Under cross-examination by Hogan's attorney, Shane Vogt, Daulerio acknowledged limits to the video's newsworthiness, including its depictions of Hogan's anatomy.

"Mr Bollea's penis had no news value, did it?" Voght asked. "No," Daulerio responded.

In answer to another question from Vogt, Daulerio also acknowledged it did not really matter to Gawker if the tape had crossed a line into sensational prying.

Link.





In truth, they hate Thiel because he supported Trump.


edit on 26-12-2016 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: lordcomac
I recognize very few of these names, but where are all the dangerous people from our existing establishment?

Where's that asshat who made propaganda legal in the US? He should be #1 on that list.


plural asshats, mighty comac. And the label of news fakers doesn't
seem to stick to the greasiest of them, namely the guys defining it.

per Wikipedia


When Reps. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Adam Smith (D-WA)
introduced their changes last year (2012), they said
their bill would modify “a Cold War-era law that hampers
diplomatic, defense and other agencies’ ability to communicate
in the twenty-first century.”

Amid much debate, however, their argument quickly became
one that focused less on ensuring Uncle Sam has his say within
the media-- and more on making sure a taxpayer-funded program
became available to those footing the costs.

You gotta love that 'hampering' thing-- it reminds me of some
stinkin' diapers, roughly the same brand of untouchable as a
politician of this caliber.

www.rt.com...


Congressmen Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Adam Smith (D-WA)
introduced “The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012”
(H.R. 5736) last week during discussions for the NDAA 2013.


Call it what you like, and rail against the sources but they're all over.
I just wonder when the guys with the two way mirrors yelling
fake are going to get tired... and later maybe tried if all the rest
of us get a little lucky.
Just staple it to a defense spending bill, they never get read.




top topics



 
20
<<   2 >>

log in

join