Sites like ATS are monitored by an analyst and assigned a threat level

reply to post by Evisscerator

---

I listed my certifications just so people in forums could know, hey there is a computer guy, maybe he can help me with my computer question. Lol...

Honestly, I must ask, why come here and post that. What honestly was your reason? Someone asked me a little bit about my background and I gave him an answer. What is the point on trying to say I don't have an understanding of the subject matter, when in all honesty I do and even more.

1. I understand the theory
   
2. I understand the concept
   
3. I understand how to apply it in real-life situations
   

reply to post by jhill76

---

No doubt you are very talented and, I manitain, very interesting. I wish you luck in your endeavors and I look forward to reading more of your perspective.

BTW, most likely Bots and analysts in some combination but, no doubt, they are paying attention as you say.

reply to post by kosmicjack

---

Might I ask, what do you mean by interesting? No pun intended, I still respect you. I just get heated when someone even hints that I am making my knowledge of information systems up.

[edit on 27-5-2008 by jhill76]

reply to post by jhill76

---

Exactly that. You bring a lot of commentary and perspective to a wide variety of threads on ATS. It's not a back-handed compliment, I do enjoy reading your posts.

Questions about credibility are just to be expected on a conspiracy site, especially when using your own experiences as a reference. No personal attack is intended.

reply to post by kosmicjack

---

Oh okay. Thanks for the clarification.

I've got to say it's fairly obvious the site is being monitored.
You really think they would put so much money into monitoring you when your outside and not online?
It's also pretty likely if a site has a high risk assessment which ATS probably has under certain catergories then I would assume some of the analysts would work to become staff on the site - makes sense to have someone on the staff to censor certain things, does it not?

If I may interject,

The process of monitoring the internet was being studied (and still is) due to the nature of the beast. The most important aspect of it must be automated filtering of phrases and word patterns by machine intelligence. Those are then reviewed as appropriate by the local agencies according to their mandate.

Sites such as ATS could be collected into a more stringent 'human' review process, but how on earth could you man an operation to review the entire site? Can you honestly keep up with everything that is being posted here? Non-stop, 24/7 - it would require a full-time shop of dozens (if not scores) of analysts and an intelligence evaluation team to develop profiles, reports, and that's without justifying the budget expense. Then there's the product. What is the point if you have no actionable information? Who is your consumer? What group will sift through the comments and opinions deemed worthy of mention - and to what end? And this is just one site!

Perhaps I would be more inclined to agree if you were to single out one topic or key-word and follow that. Perhaps calls for violence and the like, but realistically (if you believe in the principles of anonymity on the net), you might get better intelligence from graffiti on a bathroom wall.

I agree that we should always be aware that we may be monitored, and I know that I always try to conduct myself in a manner that I can explain myself if the need should arise, but this kind of 'focus' on monitoring and 'agent' interaction can set a truly negative atmosphere for us.

The notion of an 'insider' is also very consistent with the 'trust no one' school of thought, but I must remind you, you get what you give. I am not likely to trust someone who doesn't trust me. If you were to identify me as some kind of 'agent' operating to 'disinform' or 'misdirect' I would suspect you of the same.. etc and so on.

Use your common sense, and follow your heart. That's all we've got to go on (each of us). If it seems wrong, ask, if it still seems wrong, dig!

reply to post by Maxmars

---

I see your stance. Again, I have to say over and over again. I said sites like ATS, and using ATS as an example. I can say they don't sift through everything on here, just stuff that raises eyebrows. Like the powerpoint presentation, or something that deals with Bush or something like that.

But again, these are not high school students, they can tell if a person is for real or not.

[edit on 27-5-2008 by jhill76]

Man... us Ohio folk sure are wierd.... myself included

Ok on topic.

Yes people read this, yes they note things, no they dont bang down your door. Why?

When you say something right, how often are there others who say your wrong and in the end sometimes make others feel you are wrong. Whos to say the right isnt flooded out by disinfo of an accidental sort?

You don't know the difference???? Your kidding right?

Well let me help you...



en.wikipedia.org...



en.wikipedia.org...

Now I hope that helps clear up your confusion... As you say you log in daily, yet you want us to believe you do not know the difference?



As stated SIPRNET handles UP TO SECRET... which should indicate to any reasonable person that there is a higher level...

You will also noticed as stated that SIPRNET uses TCP/IP protocols, in other words it CAN be accessed via the internet... (This issue came up during a thread regarding the hacker Gary McKinnon )

And despite what you are saying about the 'clearance', while that is true for NIPRNET, the UNCLASSIFIED access... it is not so for SIPRNET

Now for those brave enough to check it out... here is the internet portal for SIPRNET... be careful (no you cannot get in the door ) but I guarantee you that they WILL know you are knocking

nic.mil...


Then we have JWICS... THIS one handle's up to TOP SECRET and maybe a little higher...



www.fas.org...

If you want to apply for work in JWICS go here
www.job-search-engine.com...

For a portal to JWICS... Again please use caution... don't be stupid
www.marcorsyscom.usmc.mil...


Above all this there is one higher... it is simply known as "The Global", however I will not share anymore on that because to offer proof I would have to reveal my source so I will leave it at that

As to the number of tax dollars that go into creating various agencies to spy on you and the world....

Here is further reading... we have compiled a list (not complete) of Intel Agencies...

My favorites is the NGA National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
(Clever how they kept it a THREE LETTER CLUB )

SPACE SPOOKS You know it had to happen



FURTHER READING

Information Awareness Office (IAO)
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Information Gatherers Page 01 - Pegasus Collection - (Work in Progress)
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Information Gatherers Page 02 - Pegasus Collection - (Work in Progress)
www.thelivingmoon.com...

NGA - National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Pentagon: The internet needs to be dealt with as if it were an enemy "weapons system"
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Internet Presents Web of Security Issues
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Information Opertions Roadmap - DoD PDF
www.gwu.edu...

Gary McKinnon and DoD Internet Policy
www.thelivingmoon.com...

THE ABOVE POST HAS BEEN SCREEN CAPTURED...

Just in case

Amusing to be sure... but I know of one that is...

However let me be absolutely clear... he IS NOT ASSOCIATED with ATS...

I know... because he came to 'visit'

And for all those thinking they are on a list?

Sorry I got top spot (now that John is gone )

reply to post by zorgon

---

Thanks for clearing up the clearance issue for all to see. It seems as though people will agree with you more if you have some substance.

Since we're naming government networks that are somewhat secure. A person out to check into Intelink.

From a previous post



So I suppose you mean 6 or 7 years total experience.

Edit: quote tag



[edit on 5/27/2008 by roadgravel]

reply to post by roadgravel

---

Did you even read it?

I said 20 sumin years technology has changed. I am refereeing to him, because he said he has over 20 yrs. experince.

reply to post by jhill76

---

Sure I did. It was right after your 'experience'. May be your should be more clear.

So what if technology changes, a person's knowledge can also change with it.

reply to post by hinky

Thanks another one for the list

I do have something to add on the "Global" as this is from a DISN public info page

Global Command and Control System (GCCS)



www.disa.mil...

Global Command & Control System - Joint (GCCS-J)



www.disa.mil...


Dagnabbit there is that pesky helicopter again

[edit on 27-5-2008 by zorgon]

reply to post by roadgravel

---

Yes. But you still have to learn it just like I did. Just because you are 20 yrs. older than me doesn't take out the fact that I can learn it just like you did.

I wouldnt be suprised to see people monitoring sites. If your ever going to plan a terrorist threat, why would you even do it over the net? How would they get my name anyways? I use school computers and when I sign up for sites I never use my real name. Its funny, because nobody that doesnt know me in real life will never know who I really am over the net, so Im pretty safe. Now, if they got ahold of my code name and I became a "threat" to the gov id feel pretty special, although I have nothing to hide or threats to scare anybody with.

To sum up what I just said, if you didnt do anything wrong, theres nothing to be worried about.

To me this would be only expected and obvious considering the sensitive nature and open topic discussions of so many serious subjects. There will always be the big brother watching and lurking.