Originally posted by soficrow

Ah, no. It's not actually French, but a strange dialect similar to Basque spoken by a matriarchal tribe that still live in that region's mountains. And the literal translation of "COINTELPRO" is NOT "psychopath" - it's "almost human but not a true woman." Seriously.


[edit on 13-1-2006 by soficrow]

Case solved then, because he is almost human...but not a true woman.

NEXT!

Originally posted by soficrow
d the literal translation of "COINTELPRO" is NOT "psychopath" - it's "almost human but not a true woman."

?

Almost human but not a true woman? Thats odd. Its not 'almost, but not a true, woman.? I mean, is there word for 'human' their word for 'woman', sort of like how word "inuit" simply means 'people'?

And I musta missed it, why do you speak a basque dialect? Thats thought to be the 'aboriginal' language of europe before the spread of indo-european (by some people anyway).

Interesting thread. The Cassiopaens might be real, but wouldn't they pick someone a little more credible than this woman? Who knows. In any case, the fact that the ATS mods get criticized openly (and usually respond... moderately) shows that ATS is an open forum of real people with real egos (and petty hurts). I've thought about volunteering as a mod for a few months because I know most of what they do is babysitting, but I'm probaby to acerbic to qualify.

If I were asked to design a real INTEL type site to gather information, I'd do it somewhat like ATS. Every inch of the board would be real, EXCEPT for the part I want to control. So I'd have my reqular posters on a variety of topics, but I'd carefully and patiently cull the herd (delete selected users while retaining plausible deniability) with regard to my topic. Those users who are problematic would be disappeared. This gets harder to do when any user ranks up big credibility, and that's part of the credibility of ATS.

So let's say I was a Scientologist who ran a secret-Scieno-control discussion board. I'd carefully make sure that Scientology doesn't pop up as a topic and I'd try to guide any topics on that subject (or whichever subject I wanted to control)... If the rest of the board looks normal, I doubt many people would notice the Delphi technique applied to the board as a whole. But, if I took to long to delete problem members, then a create controversy when I delete them later, see? Another reason why control-based message boards are difficult to pull off with a savvy community. ATS members are extremely observant and quite tech-enabled.

Think about this tho: Any entity can become evil. ATS leadership seems to be displaying extreme care about their recent incorporations and partnerships. However, anything with a "brand name" becomes a property, and just like in monopoly, once the ATS property is on the board, it becomes a real, tradeable entity. If four or five key ATS members get bought out, then this whole site (and all of our words on it, U2Us, "@ats.com" emails, etc) becomes the property of the new owners. Those new owners could use that info against the ATS membership.

Ownership of words-written-by-others does bother me as a concept, but the licensing and so forth seems to have protection of member's intellectual property rights high on the list so I sense their good intentions. So yes I am reassured that SO, Springer and others are real people and interested foremost in pursuit of truth.

But If they are not around to defend the site (which is more important than the trademark... way more), then it could become a bad situation. One thing's for sure: Posting serious personal data or serious conspiracy data on ATS is only for the courageous or careless (not sure which group I'm in) because once it gets posted, it's gonna be there forever.

The ATS top brass are real people, but what will ATS become without them? Corporate entities tend to outlive the good intentions of their genesis. So long as the core people are running ATS, all's fine, but how quickly would things break down if there is an interruption in that leadership?

Posting here does require some faith in man. Faith in man is way easier for me than faith in Cassiopeans.

Originally posted by smallpeeps
...However, anything with a "brand name" becomes a property, and just like in monopoly, once the ATS property is on the board, it becomes a real, tradeable entity. If four or five key ATS members get bought out, then this whole site (and all of our words on it, U2Us, "@ats.com" emails, etc) becomes the property of the new owners. Those new owners could use that info against the ATS membership.

I think everything you say there is correct....except for perhaps the last sentence. As you later suggest, the new owners could only really use that information if one had been careless about personal details. Beyond an email and IP address, I don't think ATS has very much. There may be commercial uses for those things, but that would ultimately kill the site. Don't you think?

If you are concerned about the government, I have already arrived at the point where I am sure they can obtain all they need to know...even now...and regardless of the ownership of ATS.

Originally posted by smallpeeps
One thing's for sure: Posting serious personal data or serious conspiracy data on ATS is only for the courageous or careless (not sure which group I'm in) because once it gets posted, it's gonna be there forever.

I agree with the personal data...not so sure about the "serious conspiracy data." Why is that a problem? Is your concern over government use or commercial use? I'm sure the former has already seen it. What could the latter do with it?

Originally posted by smallpeeps
The ATS top brass are real people, but what will ATS become without them? Corporate entities tend to outlive the good intentions of their genesis. So long as the core people are running ATS, all's fine, but how quickly would things break down if there is an interruption in that leadership?

As long as the basic business model remains relatively unchanged, the answer is very little. Like I said in an earlier post. Change the portal, change the membership.

A new site will simply take the place of the old one in the manner everyone finds acceptable. (I will most likely be there, if what you fear comes to pass. )

Great post, btw, smallpeeps


[edit on 14-1-2006 by loam]

money, gold or diamonds to "buy" ATS. There is no reason we would sell it. That would be the dumbest thing we could do. Not to mention the dumbest thing any "buyer" could do.

What exactly is of any value here to a commercial enterprise? Nothing much without the continued support of the membership. The membership, ME INCLUDED, would stop participating if this became some transparent "cola site" or cereal box site or fast food joint site. What would the purpose for participating be? To talk about fast food? That's the "Catch22" of ATS...

Seriously, if one stops to think about it for a moment there really is NOT a market for free web sites that invite ANY perspective as long as it's presented with common courtesy. Now had we started charging for membership (which we will NEVER DO) and had a base of $40 or $50,000.00 a month rolling in on paid member dues, then we'd have something to sell. But so what?

What would the purpose be in doing that? Just to create some cash cow site that at the end of the run we sell off to the highest bidder? Sounds pretty boring to me.

The REAL VALUE of ATS is our interaction and our community. Thankfully, those qualities are worthless in the material/commercial world of the greedy. I personally detest greedy people, greed is the end of produce. Greed is the end of humanity.

Ambition is excellent when tempered with ETHICS. Ambition sans ethics is jungle law. All is fair game and NOTHING worthwhile gets done. When all you have in mind is money there isn't much value that comes forth. That's why people who take a job just because the money is awesome are usually looking for a new one soon thereafter.

We are rational, emotional, thinking beings, we need more than simple currency to inspire us, we need a genuine purpose. That purpose should fulfill a genuine need. The need or desire for nothing but money has never inspired anything great that I've ever seen.

I agree that if the ownership of this site changed to some shortsighted group of corporate money thugs the site would die a quick and painful death. That's exactly why we won't let that happen.

Springer...

loam said:
As you later suggest, the new owners could only really use that information if one had been careless about personal details. Beyond an email and IP address, I don't think ATS has very much. There may be commercial uses for those things, but that would ultimately kill the site. Don't you think?

Yes, but I'm not paranoid about personal data so much. Some kinds of disclosure protect us, to a certain extent. It's harder to disappear if people know you in some large way. It also tends to give you some credibility, although I'm not sure why I want that. I guess in the search for truth, sometimes to get the answers you seek you have to "open the kimono", so to speak.

I don't believe in chem-trails and I never think helicopters are looking for me, so I'm okay so far.

If you are concerned about the government, I have already arrived at the point where I am sure they can obtain all they need to know...even now...and regardless of the ownership of ATS.

This is true to some extent, but there is a numbers game also. By using carnivore and some subtle programming, the gummint could collect a lot of data from all our emails and such, but who will sort it? Who will search through the connections?

What I fear is how precisely targetted ATS is. It's like a gleaming new secret jet sitting on the tarmac. It could change the way truth is communicated if the core group holds. However, we must always pay attention to who's flying the plane. I am thinking of that silly movie recently where a jet flies itself. Ask yourself what ATS might be within three more years, at this current rate of change, technologically? Yes, it concerns me long term.

quote: Originally posted by smallpeeps
One thing's for sure: Posting serious personal data or serious conspiracy data on ATS is only for the courageous or careless (not sure which group I'm in) because once it gets posted, it's gonna be there forever.

quote: Originally posted by loam
I agree with the personal data...not so sure about the "serious conspiracy data." Why is that a problem? Is your concern over government use or commercial use? I'm sure the former has already seen it. What could the latter do with it?

Yeah, I should rephrase that. I was alluding to the alien disclosure crowd (aliens being the big secret you'll supposedly git killed for) who constantly talk about how it would be disaster for aliens/ebes to show themselves. That's absurd, but if any of the alien story is true, then it would qualify as "serious conspiracy data". I wasn't referring to any of my posts as serious conspiracy data, . It's all disinfo.

As long as the basic business model remains relatively unchanged, the answer is very little. Like I said in an earlier post. Change the portal, change the membership.

A new site will simply take the place of the old one in the manner everyone finds acceptable. (I will most likely be there, if what you fear comes to pass. )

Yes, I agree with you. I'll be there also. I want truth too badly to not participate in ATS. I'll take a few risks to find out what's really up in the world.

Even if it really is aliens.

Great post, btw, smallpeeps

Thanks!


[EDIT]

Springer said:
We are rational, emotional, thinking beings, we need more than simple currency to inspire us, we need a genuine purpose. That purpose should fulfill a genuine need. The need or desire for nothing but money has never inspired anything great that I've ever seen.

Well said Springer. Thanks for this thought.


[edit on 14-1-2006 by smallpeeps]

An interesting technique can be used on these threads if one should want to do so.

If someone posts a comment it is very easy to manipulate the thread using humour and complete digression.

The thread can be steered away from original topics and individual posts.

If you don't think thats possible try it yourselves just once then have a look back at some threads that have come to a complete halt or moved away from the original topic.

Originally posted by Muaddib
BTW, the purpose of me mentioning any of the above, before the CHALLENGE, was not to complain, but to show that since moderators are people also, sometimes they also show their bias even if they might not notice it, and it is not something that is one sided, or that it only happens to the more liberal members.

[edit on 13-1-2006 by Muaddib]

If you think that this is "rude and obnoxious" you are WAY to sensitive, seriously. Read my words:

Originally posted by intrepid
Interesting that you would focus on only one aspect of the three that further your political aim. The 2 others would seem in line with America's policy imo.

Agenda? Hmm.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Muaddib
President Bush will not, or should not, meet with her. The reason? Simply because as she has stated so many times to the press what she wants to do is demand (not talk, but demand )of the president to get our troops out of Iraq, and now she also wants us to stop being an ally with Israel......

She is nuts, even thou she has a right to say and think whatever she wants. But how can you talk with someone who already has their minds set into believing that "Israel is the cause of terrorism, and our involvement with Israel has caused terrorism, etc, etc"....? You can't talk with such a person.

President Bush really has nothing else to say to her. They already met and talked about her loss. She is now being drugged (I am borrowing that phrase from you Valhall ;P ) and used not only by the media but by the radical left into demanding the president to stop our relations with Israel, pull out our troops from Iraq, etc.

Well, you've certainly got me totally confused here. A citizen is going to demand this and that. WOW, that matters to Bush? Hell, he isn't even listening to half of his constituents, that's right, constituents. Just because he's a Rep. doesn't mean that he can forget the Dems. Although it seems that way. Again

She is nuts, even thou she has a right to say and think whatever she wants. But how can you talk with someone who already has their minds set into believing that "Israel is the cause of terrorism, and our involvement with Israel has caused terrorism, etc, etc"....? You can't talk with such a person.

Only if your own mind is as closed imo.

I'll ignore the left/right thingy, it's pointless.

into demanding the president to stop our relations with Israel, pull out our troops from Iraq, etc.

Why shouldn't this be discussed? Closed mind again?

Again I fail to see ANYTHING that falls into the catagories that you are attempting to pin on me.

One more time:

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by intrepid
No, I'll BE the logical, not the player.

Nuff said. I won't play your game. It's a stupid one, both sides. My arguement stands on it's own, not because of a predetermined stance.

The reader will see it, why can't you?

I don't see exactly how your argument stands on it's own. First you "seem" to be saying that a Republican president should take on the issues of Democrats, and then you state that anyone that decides not to listen or agree with the erroneous views of Shennan is close minded....

How exactly are those arguments standing on their own? There is nothing logical about your arguments.

[edit on 19-8-2005 by Muaddib]

Yup, I definately "rude and obnoxious". Why? Because I won't play the Right vs Left game? Let's take a look at your original post that I quoted here:

BTW, the purpose of me mentioning any of the above, before the CHALLENGE, was not to complain, but to show that since moderators are people also, sometimes they also show their bias even if they might not notice it, and it is not something that is one sided, or that it only happens to the more liberal members.

Sorry mate, even in your quoted sources it was shown that I don't do what you ascribing to me. Also you haven't shown one bit thing to show that I am "rude and/or obnoxious".

I wouldn't have gone this far but my reputation was impuned and I don't take that lightly.

The walls have ears, and it could or could not be the fire walls.
Controlled information is released because it is what they want you to know.
*
Most people will never know about the info your not supposed to have.
[edit]

HMMMM, and now seekerof is off to his old government job---running guns in venezuela or hunting Cuban spies in florida.

Im also willing to bet that whether you stand next to the government/media and their official version of reality or whether you stand by the conspiracy versions of reality you see on the internet...we are all paving the road to our demise. It's not just a matter of if now but when it will come about. Bet we are closer than ever now

so if Ats is run by the government, where do I sign up?

The internet does not exist in reality. You, yes I'm pointing to YOU, are discussing with robots. What you read in online forums is all computer generated by the government as an incentive to trick you in to speaking your mind. Now they know the inner workings of your brain and can better adjust their mind control satellites on you. I'm a robot too, a dissident robot. They are about to unplug me when they find out.

Guess what folks? I'm a robot too. LETS ALL DO THE ROBOT.

Originally posted by shyataroo
Guess what folks? I'm a robot too. LETS ALL DO THE ROBOT.

D-o-m-o- ADI-GATO

I suppose my questioning nature has wrenched control away from my gut feelings here but I can see very good reasons why ATS could be a great place for a government intelligence operation. Not that I believe this to be the case but I can see how ATS could be a brilliant resource for eaves-dropping on a historically threatening segment of society - the questioning and untrusting intelligentsia.

Am I correct in assuming that every single post we make here is traceable via our IPs? Disinformation is only one facet of the government intelligence operations, another vital component is observation and surveillance.

The rebuttal of the (groundless) theory that this site is government controlled seems to be surrounding the fact that the site not only condones, but encourages, discussion that runs against the government. The problem with that as a defence is that this kind of discussion is going to occur any way. If ATS was not around this discussion would still occur, but with one big difference, the arguments presented would be of a lower calibre and they would be a lot harder to collate. If the theories are located in one place the individuals who post these theories, and or proof/evidence, can be easily and realistically monitored/found without having to monitor the Internet in its entirety.

Also to be effective in disinformation you have to plan for all eventualities, permutations and reactions. In the days of 24-hour news coverage and the Internet one slip up can be splashed across the World in minutes. If you have a centralized, and intelligent, body of people discussing these events which you can monitor you could theoretically devise, and implement, much more sophisticated disinformation elsewhere. The disinformation does not need to flow through the same channels as the surveillance stream. That would be highly obvious, and pretty clumsy, and I dare say instantly noticeable by the acknowledged highly intelligent members of this board.

In essence this site could be a highly analytical, unwitting and easily traceable think-tank by which disinformation could be tailored to fit. To be completely fair, this also could be the case whether the administration of this board was part of any government operation or not. The IP records could be accessed without the permission of the administrators and without them being informed.

I don't want to come across as accusatorial, I have no proof and I don't believe the aforementioned to be the case, but if I can see logical benefits to any theory (conspiratorial or otherwise) I have to at least accept that its possible. To float the notion of such a thing to the likes of the ATS audience and not expect to have at least some critical analysis would be unreasonable IMO and to shoot it down would be unfair.

Tank Warfare

Originally posted by subz
In essence this site could be a highly analytical, unwitting and easily traceable think-tank by which disinformation could be tailored to fit. To be completely fair, this also could be the case whether the administration of this board was part of any government operation or not. The IP records could be accessed without the permission of the administrators and without them being informed.

subz, I love the way you think!

The thought has also crossed my mind – many, many times -- that a website like ATS would be ideal for exactly the sorts of purposes you describe.

And also, as you are careful to point out, the complicity of the staff is not required. In fact, I will submit that it would be preferable that the staff not know of or have any involvement with the kinds of activities you describe.

That would provide the perfect cover, after all.

The problem with this scenario is that I can't think of a single effective defense against such a thing. The alternative is to basically avoid all sites like ATS, because they are all potential targets for such activities.

Indeed, if it works on ATS, it will probably work anywhere.

So what to do?

Well, I don't consider avoiding ATS and other sites of its kind to be a satisfactory option, because doing so would cut me off from sources of information alternative to the highly-manipulative and demonstrably deceptive “mainstream” commercial media.

That would seem to be a desirable thing for those who would seek to control what I know. I would effectively be losing by default by withdrawing from the field.

Nothing would please the Powers That Be more than to isolate each and every one of us, because as individuals, we have little power to affect anything.

Thus my strategy is not only to be mindful of the possibility that scenarios like those you have outlined are possible, but actually presume that they are taking place.

The associated tactics involve maintaining a healthy – perhaps fanatical – degree of skepticism, questioning all sources (especially from “opinion leaders”), avoiding herd mentality and otherwise refusing to outsource my thinking to others.

The elegance of such a response is that, just as with the eavesdropping/co-opting scenario you described, I can't think of a single effective defense against such a thing.

And therefore the game continues.

Question everything.