Keeping an Eye on Mr. Sunstein: The Government Official who Called for "Infiltration" of ATS, page 7

reply to post by Scoriada

---

Incorrect

Originally posted by Quietprofessional
reply to post by smallpeeps

---

How many years has this community been presenting its arguments, and in that time how many of its arguments have been credited?

You have not addressed the specifics of the Ford presidency and the power exchange which happened without a vote. There is a reason why you won't address the specifics. You choose to A: AVOID, or B: LUMP TOGETHER. Those are your choices. One wonders why you even responded.

Anyway, the point is, the conspirators (world power brokers) have at least a 30 year lead time on their lies and cover stories, so even myself being born in 1973, I have to do significant research to uncover truth. It takes years, and they know that typically the working man (as opposed to the idle rich lameass) has to work for a living, and that leaves no time for research. I put research before wealth or even employment, so I have been able to learn those truths for myself, which tie back to the time I was born, the 1970s. So you are describing you own ignorance about how research is even done, and how much time it takes to do.

People like you sneer at research. That to me, is funny.

Originally posted by Quietprofessional
Why has this community been so persistent for so long, with no real accomplishments to speak of?

This "community" is a paid and profitable ICANN registered domain, which deletes threads left and right, and which BARELY serves research as a goal. Is that what you mean by "community"? Because I have major gripes with ATS and most conspiracy domains and they just delete my posts where I complain so what world are you living in, pretending as if we even have a research tool on the Internet. No, we have ATS, Wikipedia and other controlled and shaped domains. There is no community.

The rest of your post is tripe.

Respond to the specifics of conspiracy. Try to preserve those posts which you know will be deleted. Try to recognize the gentle censorship of your world. Try to encourage your neighbors to awaken. Those would be my suggestions for you, if you cannot simply discuss history here, and discuss the G. Ford presidency, then you are deflecting truth.

People like you who start off AGAINST truth, are doomed. Can't you see that? I am sorry if the water is too hot for your tootsies, but 1: You'll get used to it, and 2: The pre-IP world was run by assheads, so you should expect a lot of problems to bubble forth when Internet Protocol gives everyone global communications. I mean it is like you are asking the space shuttle not to take off or something.

Let me know when you want to respond to specific conspiracy topics, and you had better stay on that topic of the thread will be deleted before you can blink. This is not a suitable time for actual research. Look at the crap tools we have. And then we have to fight off people like you who are too lazy and too disinterested to care about actual research? It ain't easy being smart and caring, let me tell you. Conspiracy researchers are the American's best friend, that is a fact.

reply to post by SourGrapes

---

I do believe that Samantha Powers was instrumental behind the "Responsibility to protect act" for the UN and it was a book of hers that inspired it. I will try to find the facts on this.

"Responsibility to Protect Act" is exactly why we are in Libya but then why not other countries. Could it be because China and Russia are aligned with Syria and Bahrain.

reply to post by smallpeeps

---

A typical tactic of someone with no real leg to stand on is to not only become overly defensive, but to transition into an unreasonably offensive posture often times lashing out at the source of their derailment on an issue. I need not provide any "research" into, nor specifics of the Ford presidency because I am not here to discuss the Ford presidency. You are mistakenly thinking I am in a position to need to argue specifics about you're view on a specific conspiracy theory or two. I am in no such position, as you are the one needing to validate you're argument, not I.

Also I assure you the "water is not too hot for my tootsies", and am far from lazy. I believe you're attention to detail regarding who you are making you're accusations about is not quite adequate. You keep speaking of research, probably would behoove you to do some about the intended victim of you're aggression. Also, making blind, and irrational accusations in situations like this only further isolate you, and erode you're credibility to readers. Again, no wonder the broad spectrum of society scoff at the kind of theory you are trying to present, look at the irrational, offensive manor in which you defend you're position, and seek to alienate anyone who tells you that you're methods of presentation are off.

- Any intelligent readers of this thread, I assume will take this "researcher's" method as an example of how NOT to present a theory, or position as it will result in giving off a similar persona of this individual's irrationality, especially to the individuals you are trying to convince.


-Regards

reply to post by celticpride

---

I like this post.

Originally posted by Quietprofessional
reply to post by smallpeeps

---

[...]

-Regards

Again with the nothing!

I am explaining factual history, that many key events went down when one president who committed crimes, was forced out of office, and the conspiracy to replace him, and the struggle for power over which the people had no oversight.

The arrangement that replaced him, was complete and utter conspiracy, which changed the world.

No see I am a man who reads facts and relationships, and who dislikes "coincidence" as an excuse. You, appear (here at least) to be the opposite of that. When you care to display any knowledge of history, please feel free to post here regarding the relationships and truth I have presented.

reply to post by celticpride

---

And that certain keywords will automatically get you noticed?

I can verify that with a personal experience. I have stated many times that there are "exercises" you can do to get a few local MIB's dispatched to check you out. It happened to me......Two days after I was Googling some information...........

People do not want to believe it....I have seen it.....

reply to post by smallpeeps

---

I'm quickly learning that you're comments aren't even worth the response, much less the read in the first place. You don't know when to change you're tune.

-Regards

Originally posted by Quietprofessional
reply to post by smallpeeps

---

You don't know when to change you're tune.

-Regards

Because my tune is perfect, it is you who fear change. But Internet Protocol cares not for your fears. I have explained it all here, and you ask me to act like you? changing tunes constantly? No, as a bard, I can pluck one string and gain a whole village. Like H. Clinton said: It takes a village.

"And it’s whispered that soon if we all call the tune
Then the piper will lead us to reason.
And a new day will dawn for those who stand long
And the forests will echo with laughter.

If there’s a bustle in your hedgerow, Don’t be alarmed now,
Its just a spring clean for the May queen.
Yes, there are two paths you can go by but in the long run
There's still time to change the road you’re on.

And it makes me wonder.
Ooooooh…

Your head is humming and it won’t go,
In case you don’t know:
The pipers calling you to join him."

and we need to look out for this too !

White House Beefs Up Online Rapid Response

May 23, 2011
www.huffingtonpost.com...

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration has created and staffed a new position tucked inside their communications shop for helping coordinate rapid response to unfavorable stories and fostering and improving relations with the progressive online community. .................

It also signals that the White House will be adopting a more aggressive engagement in the online world in the months ahead.

a hidden method of "rapid response" may be to actually post on conspiracy forums !
has anyone been noticing the new members here that are posting jibberish and getting banned the same day they joined ? and others who get cracked after relentlessly defending certain "ideologies" with general and non-responsive posts ?

Fairly recent article on Sunstein; just thought I'd link to it in the ongoing interests of this topic.

Just prior to his appointment as President Obama’s so-called regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein wrote a lengthy academic paper suggesting the government should “infiltrate” social network websites, chat rooms and message boards.
Such “cognitive infiltration,” Sunstein argued, should be used to enforce a U.S. government ban on “conspiracy theorizing.”

Among the beliefs Sunstein classified as a “conspiracy theory” is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.

The find comes as a government document reportedly relates the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s command center routinely monitors dozens of popular websites, including Facebook, Twitter, Hulu, WikiLeaks and news sites including the Huffington Post and Drudge Report.

Reuters reported that a “privacy compliance review” issued by DHS last November confirms that since at least June 2010, the department’s national operations center has been operating a “Social Networking/Media Capability” which involves regular monitoring of “publicly available online forums, blogs, public websites and message boards.”

More at source:
klein.wp.wnd.com...

Looks like Mr. Sunstein is leaving his work in the public sector and headed to academia.

Cass Sunstein, the chief regulator for President Barack Obama, said today he will resign, leaving behind a record criticized by both political opponents and White House allies.
Sunstein, 57, will leave the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which oversees federal rules, later this month and return to Harvard Law School.

Source:

mobile.bloomberg.com...

Mr.Sunstien is back in the the news again. This time he wants to change America's "Gun culture." Mm-hmm. Disappointing but why am I oh-so-not surprised?:

While he left his post as the head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs this past summer, Sunstein remains one of the most influential legal scholars of his generation. His ideas — which apply behavioral economics to public policy — are highly nuanced, and often make both libertarians and liberals nervous in equal measure.

Sunstein, along with co-author Richard Thaler, defines libertarian paternalism as follows:

Libertarian paternalism is a weak, soft, and non-intrusive type of paternalism because choices are not blocked, fenced off, or significantly burdened…Still the approach we recommend does count as paternalistic, because private and public choice architects are not merely trying to track or implement people’s choices. Rather, they are self-consciously attempting to move people in directions that will make their lives better. They nudge.
In other words, the government can present a “framework of choices” to correct “errors in risk perception.” At the Nantucket Project, a festival of ideas held on Nantucket, Massachusetts, Sunstein delivered a spirited defense of this model for regulation.

Source:

bigthink.com...

Dumbing down reality
  Posted 5 days ago with 103 member flags

The 800 Pound Gorilla Everyone Ignores
  Posted 16 days ago with 67 member flags

Organic food hit piece to coincide with California proposition 37.
  Posted 2 days ago with 67 member flags

The Illusion of Choice and Truth
  Posted 10 days ago with 52 member flags

The catch all mental health disorder... Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD)
  Posted 15 days ago with 42 member flags

A chronical of the BANKSTER WARS
  Posted 7 days ago with 42 member flags

Conspiracy Theory:The Lost Episode
  Posted 4 days ago with 39 member flags

666, NWO, Aliens and You!
  Posted 13 days ago with 36 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: