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.
Originally posted by alienreality
reply to post by Whyhi
It is actually very simple what cointel people do...
They look for any information that is counter to their mandates, or anything that goes against their current policies...
Then they use a number of techniques to minimize and discredit the offending data/story/info..
You see this on ATS a lot, but mostly it is very difficult to tell wether they are actual paid disinfo agents..
For the very discerning reader, it isn't too difficult to spot paid disinfo agents... The hard part is exposing them openly on ATS without getting banned
Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Myendica
Fine, if we must. Hypothetically, I'd say it would depend on the specifics about said agent, such as how is the agent acting, what they posting, how it is effecting the issue and most importantly, the evidence you have of them actually being an agent. If it were repeated postings that you deemed suspicious, I'd say they could be handled the same way a troll would ( Ironically censoring them from the discussion I might add ). If you had some concrete evidence of the government employing people who were tasked with spreading disinformation, I'd imagine some legal action could be taken and said evidence could be spread around and presented for scrutiny etc.
Who would be audacious and foolhardy enough to accuse someone of something they arent 100% positive of?
...I wonder about those who are so into exposing their fellow theorists without concrete proof
Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Myendica
Fine, if we must. Hypothetically, I'd say it would depend on the specifics about said agent, such as how is the agent acting, what they posting, how it is effecting the issue and most importantly, the evidence you have of them actually being an agent. If it were repeated postings that you deemed suspicious, I'd say they could be handled the same way a troll would ( Ironically censoring them from the discussion I might add ). If you had some concrete evidence of the government employing people who were tasked with spreading disinformation, I'd imagine some legal action could be taken and said evidence could be spread around and presented for scrutiny etc.
Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Advantage
Who would be audacious and foolhardy enough to accuse someone of something they arent 100% positive of?
...I wonder about those who are so into exposing their fellow theorists without concrete proof
"Without concrete proof" is the foundation of nearly every conspiracy, it's more about the persons biased views and beliefs about how the world operates and their inability to scrutinize themselves and their theories than it is about factual information. It's basically a self-perpetuating way of viewing the world that throws away critical thinking, reason, facts, etc.
Just my two cents on it anyways
Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Myendica
I'm not paid to make small talk.
~
Originally posted by Whyhi
reply to post by Myendica
How much does the CIA pay you to further divide the conspiracy theorist resistance movement by calling other conspiracy theorists who disagree with you disinformation agents?