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.
Conspiracies are cognitive devices. They are able to out
think the same group of individuals acting alone
Conspiracies take information about the world in which they operate (the conspiratorial
environment), pass it around the conspirators and then act on the
result. We can see conspiracies as a type of device that has inputs (information
about the environment) and outputs (actions intending to change or maintain
the environment).
What does a conspiracy compute?
It computes the next action of the conspiracy
Now I we ask the question: how effective is this device? Can we compare it to
itself at different times? Is the conspiracy growing stronger or weakening? This
is a question that asks us to compare two values.
Can we find a value that describes the power of a conspiracy?
We could count the number of conspirators, but that would not capture the
difference between a conspiracy and the individuals which comprise it. How do
they differ? Individuals in a conspiracy conspire. Isolated individuals do not.
We can capture that difference by adding up all the important communication
For some time now, Julian Assange has been sparring with New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller. Assange claims the paper didn't publish the material in its entirety and made too many concessions to the White House before going to print.
Originally posted by PsykoOps
How does editor of NY times = wikileaks? I don't understand that part.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Originally posted by PsykoOps
How does editor of NY times = wikileaks? I don't understand that part.
Doesn't need to make sense if it fits the paranoia narrative
Assange claims the paper didn't publish the material in its entirety and made too many concessions to the White House before going to print.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by burntheships
Well, you come on here saying the editor for the NYT checks with the government before releasing data...and then take the huge leap of faith by saying Wikileaks therefore works for the government or the NWO. That's not doing proper research, that's nothing but a bit of a joke
Originally posted by burntheships
Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by burntheships
Well, you come on here saying the editor for the NYT checks with the government before releasing data...and then take the huge leap of faith by saying Wikileaks therefore works for the government or the NWO. That's not doing proper research, that's nothing but a bit of a joke
I have presented in the thread that Assange knew before hand that the leaks were censored.
I did not leap from there to say that Assange therefore works for the Government. Your purposely twisting my words. Why?edit on 5-2-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by MrXYZ
And why is that his fault??? And how could he have stopped that??
I really hope you understand that the NYT and Guardian are all separate entities from WL. Assange has ZERO power over the others and can't just make them do or not do stuff
Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by MrXYZ
It clearly proves Assange knew ahead of time that he was cooperating with the media outlets
in releasing censored information.
The Economist Group is a group of companies that sell publications and services under The Economist brand, such as The Economist, Economist.com, Economist Intelligence Unit, Economist Conferences, Intelligent Life and The World In. The Group’s other global brands include Roll Call, Congressional Quarterly, European Voice (aimed at decision-makers in Capitol Hill and Brussels respectively), and Congress.org. It is headquartered in the City of Westminster, London
Originally posted by PsykoOps
JA doesn't censor the leaks. That is a job for volunteer network who go through them one by one and verify and censor if necessary.