posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 07:07 PM
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Until reassured otherwise, I think it's rather safe to project the views of a hand selected appointee as being those that are shared by the
I understand. For me, Obama's repeated stating of his position is reason enough for me to believe otherwise.
What Sunstein proposed is basically setting up people to raise doubts about the facts of conspiracy theories... That's what skeptics do. It's what I
do. Of course, we aren't paid by the government (at least I am not - but I wouldn't find it hard to believe that some here on ATS are).
I guess I have an issue with "runaway" conspiracy theories where people jump on the bandwagon because they "want to believe", without really
looking into the plausibility of it or thinking how rational or logical their theories might be. Without checking both sides. I welcome the dissenting
voice. I'm totally against the government paying for it
, but it's not like he is proposing censorship.
Just to be clear, I do not support what Sunstein proposes, I just don't think it's going anywhere.
The published views of this person in that position is alarming... and actually has nothing to do with Internet neutrality.
Oh, I agree it's potentially alarming, but I'm not alarmed at this point because I don't see any reason to be. My point was that I wasn't sure
that Obama agrees with him.
Johnny is tasked with representing the tone and flow of discussion on ATS, and he does that very well. For this particular issue, the overwhelming
majority of the discussion ranged from outrage or highly-speculative worse-case scenarios.
I see. I didn't realize he was tasked to represent only the majority view.
Think about it... a Harvard law professor, specializing in constitutional law, who advocates clandestine disinformation to disrupt free expression...
has been appointed to a position by the President where he may be in both an authority and advisory position to act on his policy
Yes. He may be. This might happen. I agree. But at this point, I don't see any reason to think it would go anywhere. Just as the many attempts over
the years to undermine American's right to bear arms has never born real fruit. The most they would do is show up here and plant disinformation.
That's been happening forever.
We SHOULD be suspicious and we SHOULD ask questions. I just don't get the same hit of "danger" that many are getting. We shall see...