Paid disinfo agents... we have your proof right here!

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

Why monitor a blog that speaks against say carpet bombing of peasants in Vietnam for example? Or Iraq? Or Gaza? That's my angle. Why monitor anything that exposes these acts? what do they have to learn or fear from these blogs?

The biggest concern, and probably the reason for monitoring it, is to make sure that those that are trolling or ranting, only troll and rant. There is always the concern that someone may decide to take drastic action.
One need only go back to the incident on ATS that involved the member Weise :

www.abovetopsecret.com...

to see that it is a valid concern.

reply to post by ProfEmeritus


See now this type of 'spin' really disturbs me. Apples and oranges. Employing someone to respond on anti-this, anti-that, pro-this, pro-that has, and I repeat has NOTHING to do with some psychotic gunman, because actually you could spin it the exact way, saying the amount of death caused by the military is absolutely shocking.

I'm sorry, but again, this seems a tactic in making anyone question the motive of a big brother type situation a psychotic themselves.

I will stand against this kind of spin and I sincerely hope others don't succumb to give away your freedoms to feel "SAFE". Gimme a break!

wZn

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
reply to post by jdub297

 

...and again another attempt to discredit the information. Will it ever stop?

Asking for proof of the validity of a document or statement offered as support or proof of a conclusion is not "an attempt to discredit," and should never stop!

The "information" has no creditibility to discredit without substantiation.
You must provide that youself before it can be discredited; as it stands, the "information" is a worthless concoction.

The offeror of evidence has the burden of proof in every persuasive discourse. The 'information' has no credibility without proper attribution and a cite to the source. Hearsay is no evidence in this instance; there are no exceptions to the Hearsay Rule that apply to serve as a guarantee of the trustworthiness of the matter asserted.

The "Air Force" document upon which you rely is nothing more than an unsigned picture, and it does not in any way establish "disinformation" in and of itself. Apply its contents, and show me how it does. (You can not or will not.)

In this and your previous responses, you have applied several of the "25 methods" of which you seem to express contempt.

Can you back up your position with a credible source? No!
Even if accepted as truth, does the document establish "disinformation?" No. again!
Can you understand what you read and post? Obviously not.

(I felt compelled to answer my own questions because you are unable or unwilling to do so yourself.)

This thread is a HOAX.

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

See now this type of 'spin' really disturbs me. Apples and oranges. Employing someone to respond on anti-this, anti-that, pro-this, pro-that has, and I repeat has NOTHING to do with some psychotic gunman, because actually you could spin it the exact way, saying the amount of death caused by the military is absolutely shocking.

Look, you asked a question. I gave an answer. I am not SPINNING anything. I tried to give you an honest answer. You apparently don't understand that many times, people such as Weise first vocalize, then act.
In addition, whether you like it or not, you are being monitored by ATS moderators with every post you make. They also have valid concerns, such as making sure that they don't become the object of a law suit. That is the real world. If you prefer to live in a fantasy world, fine, then don't ask real people real questions.

Think about it this way. Yes, US soldiers come to these sites. Some of the are more than likely guided in a way to respond when they are. However, at the end of the day, they are told to be honest about who they are and your argument will either stand or fall based on your ability to reason.

On their parts, yes they are, in fact, disinformation agents. However, they aren't being untruthful. What they know is their knowledge to them. They believe it.
But... They are being misled. By their handlers. Yes, it does in fact happen. But it is easy to defeat, if you can stick to the guidelines of Kant's Critiques.
Afterall, that is what the US Military is teaching its agents. But they don't realize that. In the end, they will bow out of the discussion. They will also be immaterial throughout.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 7-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

Only problem is... They are, wittingly or not, trolling.

Why? Because they aren't thinking for themselves. There are a lot of trolls about, on both sides.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Uh, that looks like someone was playing in Photoshop.
THAT is NOT proof of anything. Where is the proof that is created and issued by the USAF?

Photoshop and Illustrator would certainly be used to create an ad or chart
like this. We're not looking at a unicorn here.

Proof that it is distributed by the USAF?!
Certainly not.

reply to post by Darthorious


Actually, the phone number is listed as:

ome > Contact Us ... Air Force Public Affairs Agency Trademark Office 1690 Air Force Pentagon Washington, D.C., 20330-1690 703-696-1158 or DSN 426-1158 ...

It is the general switchboard for the US Air Force Public Affairs Agency

That is way too "colorful" to be any kind of USAF Publication. Even the Pamphlets they hand out for the Thunderbirds Demonstration Team are less colorful.

HOAX!

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
Think about it this way. Yes, US soldiers come to these sites. Some of the are more than likely guided in a way to respond when they are. However, at the end of the day, they are told to be honest about who they are and your argument will either stand or fall based on your ability to reason.

The only "guiding" that the military gives troops when we come to boards like this is, "don't divulge classified" and "remember OPSEC/PERSEC"

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
On their parts, yes they are, in fact, disinformation agents. However, they aren't being untruthful. What they know is their knowledge to them. They believe it.
But... They are being misled. By their handlers. Yes, it does in fact happen. But it is easy to defeat, if you can stick to the guidelines of Kant's Critiques.
Afterall, that is what the US Military is teaching its agents. But they don't realize that. In the end, they will bow out of the discussion. They will also be immaterial throughout.

Misled? And how are you figuring that? Have you seen the amount of BS that's posted here about the military? Some troop posts on some thread that a story is wrong, and he gets dogpiled by others screaming for "sources" and "proof". Sometimes, the only source/proof a troop has is what he's seen for himself. Of course, that's blown off as a lie.

As a graphic designer I would discount this chart as a hoax due in part to the design style which is somewhat extravagant for government work and the typeface used for the titles which appears to be a lesser known typeface which is highly inconsistent with the typical use of "Verdana/Times New Roman/Helvettica" that people so commonly use. One can only conclude that this type of work is far from the style and content consistent with government paperwork. Not to mention the file type is wrong, no organisation or business uses .jpg/.gif formats for text documents, surely a .pdf format would be the preferred medium. Oh and the use of a "g-mail" address... says it all really, this is pure bunk!

Ah yes....because I am military I am misled and an unwitting fool. Glad you cleared this up for me. While I am at it, because I disagree with this or another post I am automatically a disinfo agent. I am so tired of this baloney. How do you in fact have any proof of this?

Let's say for a moment your chart was true and real and it was indeed made by the USAF. Prove to me that each member has received such training and actually uses it

-Kyo

Let's suppose this little flier is real. (Long Shot)

How do you suppose that you can sniff us err uh I mean them out of the woodwork?

Never eben thought of that point...

would think if they were real they have vastly better technology and performance than us

yeah I am military...guarantee I am not psyop or whatever it's called

I've had two jobs...nukes...cooking...although I have lied before...told someone there was no salt in the eggs I made...

-Kyo

Originally posted by BlackOps719


I don't need any proof or guide sheet to confirm to me that online disinfo agents are real, just read any 9/11 thread and you will usually find them buzzing all around like busy little bees.


The www. is a massive source of information and can easily sway public opinion. To be so naive as to assume the PTB arent also taking full advantage of it would be foolish.

It does strike me as hilarious, however, that the military shills would need an actual chart/physical diagram to show them how to properly troll posts and spread lies.


Good find, see how long it takes for someone to "debunk" this.

Of course on the flipside, it is somewhat of a heightened sense of importance to think that one's sense of paranoia is of such concern to "the powers that be" that people are paid to be skeptics. In your minds it's inconceivable that somebody could arrive at a different conclusion based on the available information unless they were either an idiot, brainwashed, or a paid disinfo agent.

As for debunking this, or anything else- I doubt you(or CTers in general) would ever admit that something had been debunked. You'd just look for a different theory to latch onto.


[edit on 8-1-2009 by BlueRaja]

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
Think about it this way. Yes, US soldiers come to these sites. Some of the are more than likely guided in a way to respond when they are. However, at the end of the day, they are told to be honest about who they are and your argument will either stand or fall based on your ability to reason.

On their parts, yes they are, in fact, disinformation agents. However, they aren't being untruthful. What they know is their knowledge to them. They believe it.
But... They are being misled. By their handlers. Yes, it does in fact happen. But it is easy to defeat, if you can stick to the guidelines of Kant's Critiques.
Afterall, that is what the US Military is teaching its agents. But they don't realize that. In the end, they will bow out of the discussion. They will also be immaterial throughout.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 7-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

Which MOS is a Disinfo Agent by the way, and how does one get to be a handler of misguided/misled Disinfo Agents?

Real or not... this is one of the funniest flow charts I've ever seen

The only thing that makes me think it might be genuine is... Who else but the military would try and diagram something like this?

Thanks for the chuckle.

reply to post by greeneyedleo
as usual, you are seldom in agreement with anything posted regarding covert military operations.

its a covert military operation by the navy.

appropriations time is coming up and the navy is trying to make the USAF look bad.

Originally posted by musselwhite
reply to post by greeneyedleo

 

as usual, you are seldom in agreement with anything posted regarding covert military operations.

Ah! As usual you resort to snide personal comments about me. I'm telling you now - stop it. You don't know me. You don't know what I know and believe. I share what I choose to share and do not share all that I know or believe - on any topic.

And if I see something that could be wrong - I deny ignorance by participating in said discussion and providing evidence to support my position. At least im mature enough to say that if im found to be wrong, I will own up to it.

Do you have anything to add to this thread other then personal attack? Can you prove or disprove the legitimacy of this topic and the image posted? Please, show us your research and proof, we are waiting for it, as im sure you didnt just stop by to attack me personally