Paid disinfo agents... we have your proof right here!, page 6

privacy

Pages: << 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:31 PM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by ziggystar60

They would more than likely use agents on both sides of the issue. One to set up the strawmen, and another to burn them down.

To clarify myself just a little, I would be very surprised if the military didn't actively employ psyops in places like this. But that flier isn't for them. They wouldn't even need a flier. They would be some of the more bright minds in the military's service.
If that flier is for real, then it is as GreenEyedLeo (or whatever her name is) said earlier. Just guidelines for personnel seeking advice from their employers as to how to properly post online information that casts a positive light on the military.
And good on them, I say.

It is still a spun message, though.

If Burns would divuldge just a little about what his previous job consisted of, you would see what I am talking about... Chances are he worked for the AirForce as a psyops specialist.

[edit on 8-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 8-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 8-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:35 PM by watchZEITGEISTnow

reply to post by ziggystar60

I hear that. John Lear was one of those people I used to think... still unsure about him to this day. He has truth mixed with misinformation, is how I see it anyway.

I'd expect anyone in any group to be defensive and take it personal when there 'team' is targeted for something as cowardly as disinformation. Totally expect it.
The thing is, and how I've read this from Marrs to Cooper to Perkins to Icke to Maxwell to Tsarion to ATS in general .... the same theme over and over secret societies have an agenda. They don't want us the people to know about this. EVER. They will do things to hide it, they will instigate false flags and misinform a 'fearful' public. I could go on and on and on... and I may...

The bigger picture, which disinformation IS a part, will always use scapegoats (in this case the air force) to fulfill their dirty work. Always. Unless these people wake up and leave their pawn positions.

And for the record, I think the chart is totally legitimate. I don't care what any of you think, unless of course you made the chart.

wZn

[edit on 8-1-2009 by watchZEITGEISTnow]

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:35 PM by EYEOFEAGLE

Interesting!

I wonder if the Air Force has anything on me yet.

I have worked with AFI and a few PJ's. Some of the best trained guys in the world.

Did you see EAGLE EYE? Great movie.

Eye of Eagle

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:42 PM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

Mixing fair amounts of truth with the misinformation would be the best way to do it, imo... Because then you automatically get the populace to reject everything you say based on the obvious BS that you spout also...

Same way with Hollywood. If you want to discredit a certain circumstance, one very good way to do it would be to put it in a movie... Because from that point on, anyone hearing the story is going to say: "But the author of this story obviously just took his story off the premise of (insert name of movie here)"

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:45 PM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

But you must realize that THAT chart, actually does little more than tell people what a logical progression looks like. If the serviceman/woman decides to use that chart in a way to make a fallacious argument, it can, and should, be smacked down in a place like this...
I think it is nearly a prerequisite for people in places like this to have at least a working knowledge of the critiques of reason.

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:50 PM by Jay-in-AR

And here is the kicker...

The servicemen could be being completely honest, and innocent... But the simple fact that they are being fed BULLSNAP by their handlers, makes their statements misinformation...
Most (I said most, not all) servicemen aren't savvy in the ways of politics and how politics apply to the military way. They don't have the time to be. They are busy working. Very busy working. They rely on their information that is disseminated through the ranks and is often times wrong.

Therefore, their story becomes disinfo by default. While being honest, they are telling lies. If you follow me.

[edit on 8-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:54 PM by jerico65

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
The servicemen could be being completely honest, and innocent... But the simple fact that they are being fed BULLSNAP by their handlers, makes their statements misinformation...
Most (I said most, not all) servicemen aren't savvy in the ways of politics and how politics apply to the military way. They don't have the time to be. They are busy working. Very busy working. They rely on their information that is disseminated through the ranks and is often times wrong.

Therefore, their story becomes disinfo by default. While being honest, they are telling lies. If you follow me.

Well, then, what sort of "bullsnap" might a troop be fed by his "handlers"? Might you have an example??

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 05:59 PM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by jerico65

Oh, all kinds. They are the same lies that they tell the American People in their Pentagon briefings... Just look up any Pentagon briefing on youtube and you'll hear the lies out of the horses mouths. Right now I'm about to head to work, so I don't have time to expose any of their lies specifically right now, but hopefully you catch my drift.

I'll leave for a while on this note: It was never any question to me that the government uses spooks in here. I'm actually shocked that anyone would think otherwise.

I'll try to make my position here even more clear when I get home from work tonight...
Over and Out

(for now)

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 07:36 PM by watchZEITGEISTnow

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
And here is the kicker...

The servicemen could be being completely honest, and innocent... But the simple fact that they are being fed BULLSNAP by their handlers, makes their statements misinformation...
Most (I said most, not all) servicemen aren't savvy in the ways of politics and how politics apply to the military way. They don't have the time to be. They are busy working. Very busy working. They rely on their information that is disseminated through the ranks and is often times wrong.

Therefore, their story becomes disinfo by default. While being honest, they are telling lies. If you follow me.

[edit on 8-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

Exactly what I think. The "need to know basis" is the phrase that often whistle blowers and insiders talk about, so even a totally innocent person (in this case air force) has no knowledge of their role in the scheme of things. Also misinformation can be used on them without their knowledge. Good to see you as a serviceman yourself doesn't take this on board as a personal attack against your service. Also as in this case the subtle way in how the chart is briefed with nice fluffy wording hides the true big brother role I believe that is really intended here.

wZn

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 09:11 PM by jdub297

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
reply to post by jerico65

Just want to know if you believe in disinfo agents at all? If so what types of disinfo do you believe has been spread on ATS and by whom? Thanks.

Also I'd like to hear from greeneyedleo about the same question.

Thanks for your responses.

wZn

How 'bout this?

-Someone posts a bogus picture, claiming it's a document.
-They claim it supports a conclusion of "psyops" and "disinformation," when on its face it does nothing of the sort.
-They title their post "psyops" and "proof," but refuse to provide legitimate attribution or a cite to a credible source; or even explain how a flow chart supports a conclusion of disinformation and psyops.
-Any calls for proof, challenges to legitimacy, or questioning of credibility are responded to with personal attacks and specious, equally unsupported claims.

Sounds exactly like disinformation to me. Looks like you are spreading it, too.

That answer your question? (Sorry, g.e.l., I couldn't resist answering this easy set-up.)

wZn, what do you think?

[edit on 8-1-2009 by jdub297]

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 09:49 PM by watchZEITGEISTnow

reply to post by jdub297

If this chart is disinfo , and I have put the article up here without that knowledge, for sure I am being used exactly how I described in my past post (need to know/unknowingly participating in the disinfo). Could be. But then you could apply this to every news snippet from every source around the globe.

How I view this chart is a designed way for an air force personal to respond to any comments resentful toward that service. I see the wording in nice easy 'user friendly' terms, but the fact you are controlling how people respond, well that doesn't sit right with me. That's my point. Vietnam and how this was spun, until real news feeds came out showing the atrocities of the knights in shining armor as they happened showed a new slant on the propaganda fed to the masses at that time. Some say this bought about a swing in consciousness which the government/s then could not ignore.

It all comes back to personal interpretation, and opinions...none can be correct either. But should we just stop talking about this or that due to the fact, "it's bunk" or "that can't be real" or "oh that's a movie, not real life". Truth resonates with everyone, as it should, so do other beliefs or disbelief's. No one here, myself included can for sure say anything is true. No one. However we should not stop talking about it if we feel there is something more to it. After all this is a CONSPIRACY SITE, not a army recruiting site (I hope).

wZn

reply posted on 8-1-2009 @ 09:51 PM by ProfEmeritus

Disinformation on ATS should not be a problem, if members treat all posts the same. All information should be checked, researched, debated, verified by valid sources, or dis-proven by verifiable means. There are subject experts here, as well as members not classified as such, who have just as much knowledge. Given the world-wide nature of ATS, we have the advantage of peoples from many different nations who have unique perspectives on issues. In addition, I believe that ATS does check IP addresses if suspicious activity occurs, such as IP ranges dedicated to specific orgs, such as DOD, or in the case of the presidential campaign, political party IP ranges. All in all, I believe that disinformation has less chance of becoming a problem on ATS than on any other forum I know of. Furthermore, if people express their honest opinions, and obey the T & C, they should have nothing to worry about. For instance, I doubt if any members said anything about either of the 2 presidential candidates that campaign members of the candidates hadn't already said. Even in the threads concerning Israel vs Gaza, Pat Buchanan probably said more negative things about Israel than most members have. Of course, I exclude trolls from those comparisons.

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 12:37 AM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

I agree. I have been trying to say as much all along, but I often have a hard time getting my point across without branching out on several tangents along the way... Assuming people can follow.

In the end, the argument being made stands or falls on the presenter's ability to reason. Afterall, that flowchart is nothing more than a tutorial on argumentive form, or lack thereof.

Oh yeah, and to the poster asking for specific examples of Military lies... (note the questioner pointing out Rumsfeld's non sequitor argument)www.youtube.com... ... Oh, and just for fun, but it is still really good. www.youtube.com...

[edit on 9-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 12:58 AM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

"Also misinformation can be used on them without their knowledge. Good to see you as a serviceman yourself doesn't take this on board as a personal attack against your service. Also as in this case the subtle way in how the chart is briefed with nice fluffy wording hides the true big brother role I believe that is really intended here. "

Yes, you are exactly right. If it were me running the show, I would treat my soldiers like mushrooms. "Keep them in the dark and feed them feces."

I would do anything in my power to keep them happy in creature comforts and constantly stroke their egos. They will love me for that. They will make me look good to everyone they know. Afterall, they ARE doing this for their country.

You don't have to worry about offending my service to this country. I still serve this country. Every day.
I do that by trying to help expose the criminals that are RUINING this Country!!!! I am still fulfilling my oath and I will do so until the very day I die.

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 01:30 AM by americandingbat

I don't doubt that paid disinfo agents are real, or that they are used by the U.S. military. I imagine ATS is on the "watch" list for a few of them.

But what does that chart have to do with anything? All that chart proves to me is that the Air Force has a Public Relations department concerned with how its members are behaving online. And that someone in that P.R. department likes flowcharts.

Many organizations instruct their employees on the appropriate manner to represent the organization on the public level. That doesn't make the employees "paid disinfo agents."

Correcting mistakes made by others and sharing your own true experiences are not disinformation in themselves – at most, this can be called propaganda. Monitoring sites that post information critical of your organization is not disinformation.

As for how this chart reflects on ATS members who are servicemen and -women and post as "experts" on various matters – it implies that they are specifically instructed to correct mistakes and tell the truth, and not engage in flame wars. We might all benefit from following that advice.

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 10:50 AM by jerico65

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR

Yes, you are exactly right. If it were me running the show, I would treat my soldiers like mushrooms. "Keep them in the dark and feed them feces."

I would do anything in my power to keep them happy in creature comforts and constantly stroke their egos. They will love me for that. They will make me look good to everyone they know. Afterall, they ARE doing this for their country.

Ever been in the military? You don't treat your troops like that. You have to keep them informed. Stroking their egos and keeping them happy isn't going to get the mission done. They will not love you for that.

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 10:52 AM by jerico65

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
Oh yeah, and to the poster asking for specific examples of Military lies... (note the questioner pointing out Rumsfeld's non sequitor argument)www.youtube.com... ... Oh, and just for fun, but it is still really good. www.youtube.com...

And so, based on this youtube clip, all military personnel that post are liars? Nothing they say is true?

And I thought the second one was pretty funny, too.

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 01:09 PM by TheDarkHorse

This thread has been wildly entertaining, I’ve been a member here since ’04 and I cannot recall ever having a better time reading a thread. I even invited a couple of friends from other cubicles to weigh in.

The reality is; almost all of us here at ATS are guilty of disinfo whether we’re aware of it or not. When we start threads about poorly researched topics we spread disinfo. When we have a compelling argument for or against any given topic it sways people’s opinions. Is that disinfo? If it’s not correct, you bet it is! I don’t care who you are, how many points you have, how many times you’ve been applauded, you’ve been wrong at one point or another.

If there are people here at ATS actually getting paid to PURPOSELY dissuade, or intentionally misguide those of us who are so blindly passionate that we cannot see the forest through the trees; that’s an absolute shame. But not the least bit surprising…..

[edit on 9-1-2009 by TheDarkHorse]

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 02:38 PM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by jerico65

I think you may be misunderstanding me...

What I mean by keeping the soldiers happy in creature comforts is 1) making sure there is plenty of booze to go around. 2) take care of their bills for them. 3) make sure there is a strip club right outside the front gates of the post.

And yes, military personnel have their egos stroked all the time. Listen to the JarHeads talk about their "beloved corps"... So on and so forth. Yeah, you have to be tough on your soldiers at times, but you also have a duty of making sure they still have a lot of pride and soldiers do.
Again, I am not talking bad about soldiers...
And yes, I did serve in the Army. For six long years.

Here is another funny video with Rumsfeld... This one is completely off topic, though.... But it made me smile, in a good way. www.youtube.com...

And to answer your two questions... No, I never said that everything that soldiers say is untrue. If you had followed the discussion to this point, earlier I was talking about how you can add truth to the obvious BS and the entire message comes across as wrong. You see, from someone on the other side of the fence's perspective, they often times don't put much trust in what the military has to say because they know that the entire reasoning behind the war, that they have been told, is bullsnap. Therefore, when a soldier comes on board talking about the liberation of the Iraqi people, not only is it immaterial to the question of the war in the first place, they often times aren't given the "benefit of being true."
I decided to put those last words in quotations because they came from Rumsfeld's mouth itself... "That statement is completely incorrect because it has the benefit of being true."

PS... I am using, for the sake of the discussion, the example of faulty pre-war intelligence and the arguments stemming from there, as a justification to wage what is technically an illegal war. This IS, BY DEFINITION, disinformation... And it is spread on these forums, by soldiers themselves who support those ILLEGAL decisions. There really isn't an argument here. This is verifiably true.

[edit on 9-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 9-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 02:40 PM by Jay-in-AR

reply to post by TheDarkHorse

I agree. If you take the two above examples of the military lying to the public and then realize that those lies are spread throughout the ranks (and how DARE ANYONE question the Secretary of Defense!)

You can see how, literally, you have just created an army of disinformation agents. It would also be a good idea for them to identify themselves as US soldiers... As a title tends to lend credence to a claim.