DIS-INFO AGENTS (the things I don't understand)

If there are that many disinfo agents posting on here (which there appears to be), and all over the internet for that matter, how much do they know about what's going on?

How much are they told about the things they are supposedly spreading disinformation about? Are they briefed on the true story, or just told to spread lies and confusion like a good little sheep, and not to ask questions?

I know if I worked for a company and they asked me to do something as outrageous as these losers are doing (going round telling lies to as many people as possible), I would want to know why. I would want to know the truth.

Even if they are not told exactly what's going on, surely the fact that they are asked to spread disinformation on a certain subject confirms to them that the other story is true.

I really don't know how they can do their job and sleep at night.

e.g. They are told (directly or indirectly) by officials that 911 was an inside job, and are told to make as many people as possible believe that it was terrorists from Afghanistan.

So if they know that their own government has been lying to everyone (including them), why would they want to work for them? If they are told this, why not get the truth out to the people?

And if there are that many of these lowlife disinfo agents, which there would have to be to have any impact at all, why has this not happened ONCE? I don't get it!
Surely one of them would have the balls to come clean and provide proof the the US gov are hiring people to spread disinformation.

TO ALL DISINFO AGENTS:

YOUR OWNERS ARE LYING TO YOU, DO NOT WORK FOR THEM, THEY CAN NOT BE TRUSTED. BY WORKING FOR THEM YOU ARE HELPING THEM, NOT YOURSELVES.

There's a disinformation "agent" trying to tell me that producing hydrogen from water is really hard and consumes tons of electricity, which is a lie. I hate it when those people use pseudoscientific nonsense in an attempt to disprove factual information.

reply to post by HexagonSun


So, am I to believe that you tend to believe that anyone who does not share your opinion on a specific subject, 9/11 for example, to be a paid "disinfo" agent? Does this not strike you as an illogical assessment? A bit egocentric possible?

Would it not make more sense to simply assume that different individuals might have divergent opinions and ideas? To assume your opposition to be paid, dishonest, "agents" does not lend well to debate at all and indicates that you have predisposed and cement opinions which will not be bent or altered as you will dismiss opposing views as illegitimate.

~Heff

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by HexagonSun

 

So, am I to believe that you tend to believe that anyone who does not share your opinion on a specific subject, 9/11 for example, to be a paid "disinfo" agent?

No. I didn't say that once. I like people having different opinions, it helps get to the bottom of things and tests our debating skills. There is a major difference between people having different opinions and people blatantly trying to cover something up and spread disinformation. You should know this already, having been here 3 years and all.
If you don't think these people exist, good luck to you. Find another thread.

Hex

It really takes very few agents spreading lies, misinfo, and stirring up strife between people to get the job done.
A few well placed and timed posts and threads. A few fingers pointed at the right people. A couple of u2u's stating that so and so may be an agent.

As to what they know. I would say they only know what they need to know to get the job done. And I'm sure they have different levels of knowledge depending on placement.

I think it's important to remember that "divide and conquer" is a golden rule for these agents. So the more division and paranoia they can cause the better.

Don't get too caught up in it. It's not worth it. Just be yourself, and let them play their little game.

I was only using 9/11 as an example by the way. I don't want to get onto that subject here. Maybe I should have used another example

reply to post by HexagonSun


In three years on this forum I have encountered precisely two posters who appeared to be agenda driven, professional posters. In both cases they managed to keep an audience for about a month before their one dimensional propaganda was seen for what it was and was ignored by the bulk of the ATS community.

The assumption that there are droves of paid posters and professional disinfo agents on ATS is taking the easy way out and doesn't address the realities of how intelligence organizations work. The NSA doesn't want to tell you what to think. They want to know what you really think - what your core beliefs are once emotion comes into play.

In short, you have no need to fear an "OS" person... But you might well have a reason to fear the posters who come along with militant and strongly worded anti establishment threads. These are the little nooks and crannies of the Interwebs where people tend to find themselves targeted, scrutinized, and manipulated.

BTW this is not the opinion of a guy with 3 years on ATS... It's the opinion of a guy who's been online since the 1980's. Take it or leave it as you wish.

~Heff

Originally posted by Klassified
It really takes very few agents spreading lies, misinfo, and stirring up strife between people to get the job done.
A few well placed and timed posts and threads. A few fingers pointed at the right people. A couple of u2u's stating that so and so may be an agent.

As to what they know. I would say they only know what they need to know to get the job done. And I'm sure they have different levels of knowledge depending on placement.

I think it's important to remember that "divide and conquer" is a golden rule for these agents. So the more division and paranoia they can cause the better.

Don't get too caught up in it. It's not worth it. Just be yourself, and let them play their little game.

edit on 8-1-2011 by Klassified because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-1-2011 by Klassified because: (no reason given)

Thanks for posting. I always thought that you would need a large number of these people to make a difference.
If I wanted the whole world to believe a certain thing, I wouldn't be able to do it with a few of my mates.
But I guess they have mainstream media on their side, and I don't.

Originally posted by Condemned0625
There's a disinformation "agent" trying to tell me that producing hydrogen from water is really hard and consumes tons of electricity, which is a lie. I hate it when those people use pseudoscientific nonsense in an attempt to disprove factual information.

As you say, it is an "attempt" to disprove. Stick to objective characterizations in the discussion. He says electrolysis is "really hard". I'm guessing you're saying it's easy. These are inherently subjective opinions and, since they can not be quantified, are not really amenable to proof. Stick to the quantifiable. Now, "tons" is a measure of mass, or more properly, weight. You don't measure electricity in tons. You can measure it in kilowatt hours, joules, volts (which are joules per coulomb), or watts (which are joules per second), or, to measure total amounts used in a process, take the integral of the power in watts over the time period of the process. Overcome his pseudoscience with your science, with references. For instance, describe the process of electrolysis of water in thermodynamical terms. Give the equation with the assumed factors listed. For example, for water electrolysis, cite the standard potential of -1.23V, and list the assumptions of temperature (usually 25C) and pH, usually 7. Explain the Nemst equation and why it is important. Give the stoichiometric chemical equations at both the cathode and anode. Explain the difference between the reduction reaction producing diatomic hydrogen gas and the oxidation reaction on the other side producing oxygen. Use real numbers. Explain why 96435339Cmol^-1 is an important number, as well as 1.602^-19. Then use the correct numbers in the equation to show total kilowatts of electricity used to produce each mole, using the correct bond dissociation energy for each hydroxyl bond (460 kJ/mol, but you knew that, right?). Be sure and allow for inefficiencies to stave off those arguments. Then to cap it off, compare the energy contained in the mole of hydrogen gas with the energy used to make it
The pseudoscience guy will be pounded. And you on the other hand will be right. You won't be happy, but you'll be right.

Good luck.







)

reply to post by Hefficide

Well said Heff.
Things were a little different back in the 80's for us. Were they not? BBS's and baudrates.

reply to post by HexagonSun

Thanks for posting. I always thought that you would need a large number of these people to make a difference. If I wanted the whole world to believe a certain thing, I wouldn't be able to do it with a few of my mates. But I guess they have mainstream media on their side, and I don't.

There was a thread on ATS a while back that just really got out of hand about this very thing. A lot of accusations and u2u's flying around. IF there was an agent in that thread, it was only one. The rest was all done by the posters themselves. Plain old "lynch mob" mentality and paranoia.

reply to post by HexagonSun


Honestly i'm surprised I haven't been labeled a disinformation agent .. i think that phrase is thrown around all too often when someone is disagreed with.

The bottom line is the news and information we deal with here on the ATS forums tends to be fringe and rather.. extreme .. there are a lot of brilliant people here who look at things with a clear mind and with the proper scientific objectivity needed but then there are also a lot of people who are absolutely convinced of something without any sufficient evidence.. I hate to bring this up but the subject of Chemtrails are a perfect example.. quite a few will see perfectly normal contrails and insist that they are chemical in nature and the moment someone says they are most likely typical every day run of the mill contrails, the dis-info-agent often follows.. and I think that's rather absurd.

Do I think there are dis-information agents? sure .. do I think they are around these forums? wouldn't be beyond reason to think there could be a few lurking around depending on the topic.. but I think it's FAR less wide spread than people tend to think .. some people just believe an idea so passionately and with such conviction, no matter how far fetched and un-substantiated, that they defend it aggressively to the point of labeling those that take a contrary view because they believe it so intently that if you don't, you must be against them.

Just my thoughts

reply to post by HexagonSun


There are so many people not able to find work. Did you notice this problem?

I do not appreciate your disparaging remarks concerning an honest days/nights work for a decent pay.

Being a dis info agent pays very well and I can stay home and do other scams at the same time.

I do not always believe what they tell me to say but hey it's a living for me and my dogs.

Originally posted by HexagonSun
No. I didn't say that once. I like people having different opinions, it helps get to the bottom of things and tests our debating skills. There is a major difference between people having different opinions and people blatantly trying to cover something up and spread disinformation. You should know this already, having been here 3 years and all.
If you don't think these people exist, good luck to you. Find another thread.

Why should he find another thread? He's questioning your very premis that ATS is full of disinfo agents, paid no less. You seem to take that for granted yet you've offered no proof whatsoever. If there is a "major difference" then you need to be able to articulate what that difference is. You haven't done that. It's just as logical to claim that demons are infesting your house. Prove they are NOT there!

What I see on ATS is people who dare to take issue with ANY conspiracy theory, no matter how outrageously ridiculous, are immediately labeled "dis info agents." Of course the accuser is attempting to discredit the poster by wanting him to fall into the trap of having to defend himself against the accusation. It's a form of ad hominem attack that has nothing to do with the subject matter at hand.

ATS certainly has its share of contrarians who enjoy disrupting conversations for the sake of doing so, and like to pat themselves on their own backs for displaying wit and sarcasm. We've seen some of that on this thread already. This is also not a homogeneous group. I think sometimes the youthfukl left is actually surprised that there are differing opinions in the world.

But as for paid, as in by the government or an NGO, dis info agents on ATS? I'll take the null hypothesis and suggest to you that there are none. That's a complete and utter fantasy. That's not to say ATS is not 'monitored.' It may very well be. If you're interested, I'll take you through how that is done. But as far as 'agent provocateurs' on ATS. There are none.

It simply isn't necessary.

I agree dis info agents are a hassle and can make debates go on for much longer than what they should, but it is part of the scientific process at the end of the day. Only after all the reasonable explanations have been exhausted are we left with what could be describe as the answer, no matter how unreasonable it may seam. People lie for all kinds of reasons, if someone is getting paid to pick holes in theories then the theories have to be reassessed and made stronger. Once the theory is rock solid bullet proof then ATS or which ever sight compiles it can send it of into cyberspace and problem solved, grab a beer and back into it tomorrow for the next one.

It is a bit silly when dis info agents fail to read the threads and other information supplied and come up with non relevant information or repeats already resolved parts, then they just look ignorant and counter productive to the debates.

Not all, but a lot of disinformation agents are pretty easy to spot, if you just look at there past posts.

That being said, I personally feel that many of the "agents" probably have some kind of documentation on how to deal with certain types of posts. Each agent is probably assigned to a specific topic in which they have been trained on the "facts" and how to counter any opposition.

They are just following orders, and have probably been so brain washed that no proof will get them out of there slumber.

However, if they do know the truth and are purposely hiding it, (which I feel is sometimes the case) God help them, because they have condemned themselves to hell.

Most probably feel they are at war against opposition to the "way" things are, and it is a fight for freedom. What they fail to see is that our freedoms are slowly diminishing already, and we are just trying to save our countries, and it's people from virtual slavery.

Originally posted by thewholepicture
Not all, but a lot of disinformation agents are pretty easy to spot, if you just look at there past posts.

I of course now have to know who you've spotted as an agent and how you proved that to be a fact? if it's so simple to spot them then surely you have evidence of that? .. it's easy to assume something based on someone's past posts but that's about it.

As with most topics on this forum it's all just theory and conjecture until proven otherwise. I still think that more often than not, when someone disagrees with something and keeps debunking that they are often looked at as a disinformation agent for simply disagreeing and sticking to more conventional possibilities..

I've been in threads on this site where I've been asked to prove that something ISN'T what they think it is and that's a very backwards approach .. I shouldn't have to prove to you that it's not the unusual thing you believe it to be when there are dozens of plausible and known explanations .. again, chemtrails are a perfect example .. it's not on me to prove they aren't when contrails are a common, normal thing .. it's on the person making the claim to attempt to back it up and to be ready to hear the rational possibilities against it.. that's how it works.. taking the contrary position doesn't make someone a disinformation agent... may make them very skeptical or very dug in to scientific methodology ..

I'm not saying they aren't out there, but I don't think they'd be very aggressive in their approach and probably not all that easy to spot.

Originally posted by miniatus

Originally posted by thewholepicture
Not all, but a lot of disinformation agents are pretty easy to spot, if you just look at there past posts.

I of course now have to know who you've spotted as an agent and how you proved that to be a fact? if it's so simple to spot them then surely you have evidence of that? .. it's easy to assume something based on someone's past posts but that's about it.

As with most topics on this forum it's all just theory and conjecture until proven otherwise. I still think that more often than not, when someone disagrees with something and keeps debunking that they are often looked at as a disinformation agent for simply disagreeing and sticking to more conventional possibilities..

I've been in threads on this site where I've been asked to prove that something ISN'T what they think it is and that's a very backwards approach .. I shouldn't have to prove to you that it's not the unusual thing you believe it to be when there are dozens of plausible and known explanations .. again, chemtrails are a perfect example .. it's not on me to prove they aren't when contrails are a common, normal thing .. it's on the person making the claim to attempt to back it up and to be ready to hear the rational possibilities against it.. that's how it works.. taking the contrary position doesn't make someone a disinformation agent... may make them very skeptical or very dug in to scientific methodology ..

I'm not saying they aren't out there, but I don't think they'd be very aggressive in their approach and probably not all that easy to spot.

edit on 8-1-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)

here's a little help with detecting DAs

25 Rules of Disinformation

Great care has to be taken here not to stir up a witch hunt or an inquisition. Although I don't agree there are no agents on ATS. At the same time. You'll find them behind every door, and under every rock if you allow yourself too.

As I said before. Don't get caught up in it. If we do, we do more damage than any agent could ever do.

And any one or more of those 25 tips could fit a variety of folks at any given time. It's just human nature.

I would have to say that there is so much Dis-Info posted by regular ATSers, that dis-info agents are not really needed.


BUT saying that, I find all the threads about holographic planes in the 9/11 forums highly suspect because they are so very effective in undermining the cause of finding the truth on what happened on that day. Those threads make all of us disbelievers of the Official Story look bad and paints us all with the same brush as nutjobs.