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.

 

When will you be able to get information ONLY from Fox News and CNN?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   

When will you be able to get information ONLY from Fox News and CNN?


www.opednews.com

In answer to the question posed in the title, perhaps, if the Pentagon has its way, when the first bombs drop on the nuclear facilities in Iran.

Imagine, you log on to OPEDNews and within minutes your computer goes blank, and you cannot connect to the Internet. Where will you find out what is happening? Will you try to reload your operating system suspecting a virus attack from a hacker in a distant land? And during the time it takes to reload, several hundred bunker busting bombs and missiles have devastated large areas of Iran. Your computer still cannot connect to the Internet, so you turn on the TV and find that all over the news is stock footage of planes taking off from aircraft carriers and missile launches as in the ‘shock and awe’ of the Iraq invasion.

How could you find out what is really going on – like the inevitable retaliations of the Iran regime to strike back at Israel and US forces in the Gulf region?

Short answer – you can’t.

It would be a news black out, courtesy of the Pentagon, similar to the ‘embedded’ journalists of the Iraq invasion but with much more control of what you are allowed to know.

Extracts…

“According to Wired defense analyst Noah Shachtman,

The Air Force wants a suite of hacker tools, to give it "access" to -- and "full control" of -- any kind of computer there is. And once the info warriors are in, the Air Force wants them to keep tabs on their "adversaries' information infrastructure completely undetected.”...”
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Coming soon to a TV near you, spoon fed, drip by drip propaganda showing only what they WANT you to see.

If the pentagon gets its way we'll only be able to read about one side of any future "engagements" and will be blocked from viewing "subversive" news sites, leaving the stooges of the MSM in charge of all information we get.

If it were the MSM alone that was reporting on iraq, it's likely we would know nothing of importance about what goes on.

Nothing about rendition flights, torture, secret prisons, atrocities or anything else not sanitized by the PTB.

www.opednews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   
This scenario makes no sense because I am sure you have heard of the foreign press right?
There are many other news organizations in that area of the world which will be reporting the news. So, if the U.S. MSM cannot get info from the Pentagon, they will report stories from the foreign press.

And why would the internet go down?



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


Imagine a complete information firewall similar to what China has. They would block site by tags. Similar to what a workplaces uses for content filtering. You would not be able to get anywhere that was not preapproved for consumption. As for TV, well up in canda they have this nifty little thing they for getting CRTC rules (Canadian Radio and Television Consortium or similar to that). We can watch US channels, but if the same thing is being shown on a Canadian channel, we get the Canadian feed. They would be able to route all news to CNN or FOX. All of a sudden your BBC feed would be featuring US talking heads. The technology is all there and already in play, all they have to do is flip the switch.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


Try actually reading the story, and you'll see exactly why your internet could be blocked



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   
The same government that can't even keep the Pentagon email system from being hacked into is supposedly going to somehow be able to block out whole chunks of the internet? That same government? Not only do I not buy into this story, I don't believe it is possible that a government so inept at managing their own IT systems could stop a noob from cracking any information embargo they try to place on the web, let alone anyone with any hacking experience.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Whats more likely to happen is the MSM News outlets will be told exactly what they can and cannot broadcast. Government representatives would pre-edit the news so that it contains no negative information, and shove in a few bits of propaganda while they're at it.

I mean, this is how it's been done so many times in the past. Especially in times of war.

Of course the government won't say it's for propaganda purposes... they'll tell you it's so the news doesn't accidentally report any strategic secrets to the enemy.


As for the internet, disinformation is the way they will handle that. Flood the internet with information thats either obviously bogus, or a tangled mess for the internet users to unravel.
What will that do? People will get tired of finding so much garbage on the net, that they'll turn back to the MSM for their answers.


A blackout would be too obvious. People across the country would be demanding to know what happened.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Rook1545
 

I know they could do it, but my question is why would they do it? It makes no sense. I just don't think they would go through all the trouble to disable the internet.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


Try actually reading the story, and you'll see exactly why your internet could be blocked



Oh, glad to see you took me off ignore.

I did read it and it does NOT say why they would disable the internet.
So please, stop projecting your thoughts into what I am actually saying.


Anyway, there is no point to disable the internet. No point what so ever.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by johnsky
 


We've seen that most recently with the embeds - a classic example of the armed forces attempting to control the media.

As far as net control goes, I think we may soon see the start of something new as government continues to try and control the flow of information:

The government is growing increasingly interested in waging war online. The Air Force recently put together a "Cyberspace Command," with a charter to rule networks the way its fighter jets rule the skies. The Department of Homeland Security, Darpa, and other agencies are teaming up for a five-year, $30 billion "national cybersecurity initiative." That includes an electronic test range, where federally-funded hackers can test out the latest electronic attacks. "You used to need an army to wage a war," a recent Air Force commercial notes. "Now, all you need is an Internet connection."

On Monday, the Air Force Research Laboratory introduced a two-year, $11 million effort to put together hardware and software tools for "Dominant Cyber Offensive Engagement." "Of interest are any and all techniques to enable user and/or root level access," a request for proposals notes, "to both fixed (PC) or mobile computing platforms... any and all operating systems, patch levels, applications and hardware." This isn't just some computer science study, mind you; "research efforts under this program are expected to result in complete functional capabilities."

source

This sounds pretty much like an attempt at net control to me - of course it will start with the usual "war on terror" excuse, and swiftly move on to what different agencies think are "subversive" activities, in much the same way as other laws have.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 



Originally posted by WhatTheory
This scenario makes no sense because I am sure you have heard of the foreign press right?
There are many other news organizations in that area of the world which will be reporting the news. So, if the U.S. MSM cannot get info from the Pentagon, they will report stories from the foreign press.


I think that budski answers your question in his own post:



If it were the MSM alone that was reporting on iraq, it's likely we would know nothing of importance about what goes on.

Nothing about rendition flights, torture, secret prisons, atrocities or anything else not sanitized by the PTB.


Plus, don't forget radio. Ham radio is often the only source of communication in areas of tragedy.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Good point about ham radio jsobecky, the only problem is that it's a bit of a dying art, especially with the advent of DAB and other digital media.

How kids today could actually tune an old fashioned radio - and put up with the interference



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Just wanted to ring in here with a little chart that I've used before. It's a bit outdated, but relevant to the topic at hand I believe.




posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


These people are outrageous! They see how powerful the internet has become and now they want to put severe limitations on it. I guess it is plain and obvious that with a vast and open instant information sytem that is the computer, we stunt them just a little more than they'd expect. It is possibly the one thing alone, that makes it harder for the bastards to take over. After all, the real power is influencing the masses, and when we have the internet, we can find reasons to not buy into the misleading persuasions of the media.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Yea that sounds possible, but you don't point out the chains of conglomerates and mergers that are making it difficult to see at a glance who is really controlling who. Look at the people who own Disney? Eli Lilly is not gonna be on the top of it, it is gonna be some other companies and then at the very head Eli Lilly owns these other companies, but one of the companies under her belt own Disney. So that diagram looks like BS to me!



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Pocky
 


2 Words

Rupert Murdoch

Nuff said.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Can you send me a video along with that? Oh, you got to see this video, if you have not already. What shady (()#_)!



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Pocky
 




Yea that sounds possible, but you don't point out the chains of conglomerates and mergers that are making it difficult to see at a glance who is really controlling who...So that diagram looks like BS to me!


So is it your view then that parent companies have now power or effect over their subsidiaries?


I for one, am of the opinion, that a parent company will certainly take an active role in anything that might be in contradiction to their goals. Especially in the media.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
The point has been made that teh Pentagon´s IT techies are not the geniuses they should be. This may well be true considering the security leaks mentioned earlier.

Combine this tidbit with the closing paragraph of the OP´s snippet. The powers that be want to recruit hackers!

Obviously, good hackers, crackers and programmers are the top-end of the computer pile, but often are quite anarchistic too - especially the crackers - so they may have a hard time ´enlisting´ the services of these individuals.

HOWEVER...

Money motivates many. Much money motivates more. HAckers could be offered extortionate amounts of money to join ´the dark side´.
Maybe we need to start a ´trend´ (for want of a better word) that dictates that hacker sell-outs are VERY UNCOOL.... or un|33t....whatever.

The nerds could destroy our communications liberty!



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Definitely , those guys are the invisible executives of their subsidiary companies. I mean, these guys own banks aside from manufacturing companies. As long as they have a leash on you that is called a loan or mortgage, they pretty much own you. I believe these guys are more surreptitious this time around. If you really want to own a company, own it with by their debt to you, their unpaid loans and interest to you. That is how they really have their puppet companies by the choke.

[edit on 21-7-2008 by Pocky]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join