ATS News 10 - Obama Administration Staffer Wants To Stop Conspiracy Theorists!

page: 3
103
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Honestly, if you want to stir things up and get more traffic, then cry foul and try to get together with the Huffington post, and push to get on msm in the role of defending free speech.
Utilize the size of your site as collateral, and get a petition going to counter the bonehead in the white house who is trying to ban or criminalize people's opinions, and/or sites that support thus.
The truth movement obviously has hit a sore spot and is also gaining more weight for someone to take a stand against sites like this. (We must be closer to the truth than we know) Try to get in touch with other admins of similar sites and make a statement to the press in anyway you think may get attention.
We can't let those in power, who supposedly work for us, to move against public opinions and our constitutional rights...They work for us and are paid by us, but they seem to forget that. It's time to remind them.




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Bill! Phoenix, huh? Welcome to the great Southwest! I lived in Phoenix for 15 years. I'll be interested to hear what you have to say come July or August.



Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, make no mistake that it's a valid inference to assume the POTUS shares the views of his appointees...


Every single view of every single appointee? I don't think that's safe to assume. After all, Obama has appointed people from all across the political spectrum. I'm not saying he doesn't agree with what Sunstein said in this speech from 2007, but according to his public statements, Obama strongly supports Internet Freedom:



PBS

I am a big believer in technology and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information. I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable. They can begin to think for themselves. That generates new ideas. It encourages creativity.


You can argue that he's lying and really doesn't feel that way, but his widely-stated position is very strongly against Internet censorship.

I was also disappointed with Johnny's failure to present both sides of the issues he discussed. I know some call this a "conspiracy board", but it would be nice to see the skeptical side of these issues shown and covered as well.

Example: In the Right to Bear Arms thread I posted a link to the FULL video and noted that Sunstein said the Supreme Court should not reject an individual right to bear arms. If you listen to the edited version, you are only going to get part of the picture.

Good job, Johnny! Thanks for your work!



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Every single view of every single appointee? I don't think that's safe to assume.

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 President. Especially when the views, such as in this case, are rather broadly published and widely discussed.
forbes.com

Sunstein is well known for his academic writings, which touch on everything from constitutional law to behavioral economics.

And especially since his appointment to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs was reviewed and approved by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Oversight Committee.

The published views of this person in that position is alarming... and actually has nothing to do with Internet neutrality.




I was also disappointed with Johnny's failure to present both sides of the issues he discussed. I know some call this a "conspiracy board", but it would be nice to see the skeptical side of these issues shown and covered as well.

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.



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 recommendations.

This action is not one of hope.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

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 President.


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 recommendations.


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...



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Wow. Welcome to Phoenix SO! Let me know if there are going to be any gatherings here in the valley, it'd be cool to be able to put faces to some of the names.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Frankly it seems that Obama is tired of the propaganda being spun by Fox News.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
i can't believe ATS is making a big deal of a rumor.

especially one concerning Obama. I thought you guys were better than that. Paint me bitterly disappointed with you.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ll__raine__ll
i can't believe ATS is making a big deal of a rumor.

What aspect of this do you believe is a rumor?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


please don't bat your big brown eyes at me and act all surprised that your government might be interested in your site. we both know there's enough content on here to warrant a second look.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Not here...


Yet there are some unhealthy topics on some of the fairy tale boards boss..



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ll__raine__ll
and act all surprised

It's one thing to have speculated for years that "disinfo operatives" would be active on sites like ATS, it's quite another for a POTUS appointee to have written papers on doing just that -- not to mention that he's a Harvard Law Professor with a specialty in constitutional law.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


well that's like saying you didn't believe us all along. and this is your site dude.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   
uncle. lol.

i don't want to argue with you dude.

peace.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:15 PM
link   
I would not get into law, but I would moderate heavily on the parts of the sight that provide the what if faction, sure most are children but brethening other aspects of light into account may be a demise... Again when clear minded tomarrow I may add more or just simply forget being a part.. With ALL due respect their are some bizarre creatures that habit this site, in the fairy tale sections... Seriously.. I love this place for the news and science sections.. There are some smart people here...



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ll__raine__ll
well that's like saying you didn't believe us all along.

Oh, I believed it was happening. But again, that was all well-informed speculation... now we have someone who advocates an organized effort providing direct advice to the President.

Stunning.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   
I guess people forget to not
the messenger but then again it must be Obama and his
cohorts that ruin our way of life.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


I would not give them that much respect..



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   
This is a site that allows people to talk or test how they feel. I respect the parts of the kiddy fairy tale sections and do not seek its demise or failure, it in essense is part of growing up. If some man stands before us and says we cannot do that well I may be one of the first to say why and cause problems.


this site is more good then bad.. Quote me if you wish but it is mostly good, sure their are some thing that need to be moderated like demons posting on topics or aliens proclaiming to give ignoant pdople knowledge, i think if this can be adjusted this will be a site all wish to come to, to get their news and express their idea's. A better quality of people....

[edit on 22-1-2010 by Bicent76]



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


lol. fair enough. *thumbs up*



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Surely history must have taught these government fools, that merely throwing out BS to confuse the membership of this merry site, will do precisely nothing that hasnt been done by the likes of Alex "Thrice Damned" Collier and others .Their sort doesnt even have to JOIN a site like this, in order to divide the membership , they just spout bull and wait for the idiots to defend them!
To be honest, with the amount of hoaxers producing fake video evidence for UFOS, and what have you , the amount of damage being done to the the cause in general (the one we all serve by being interested in the denial of ignorance) is already staggering, and the government couldnt add to the weight of troubles heaped upon us if they tried.





new topics

top topics



 
103
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join