The Propaganda War Against Us: The First Shot Is Fired

The Propaganda War Against Us: The First Shot Is Fired

Hello once again ATS!

This morning, barely awake after a long night of insomnia fueled tossing and turning, I come to you with news. News that is relevant to every single person who can read these words... every single person who peruses any number of websites - ATS included...

Big Brother has fired the first shot of the impending war directly over our bow.

Online forums provide key havens for terror plots

WASHINGTON (AP) — In secretive chat rooms and on encrypted Internet message boards, al-Qaida fighters have been planning and coordinating attacks — including a threatened if vague plot that U.S. officials say closed 19 diplomatic posts across Africa and the Middle East for more than a week.

For years, extremists have used online forums to share information and drum up support, and over the past decade they have developed systems that blend encryption programs with anonymity software to hide their tracks. Jihadist technology may now be so sophisticated and secretive, experts say, that many communications avoid detection by National Security Agency programs that were designed to uncover terror plots.

Exactly how U.S. spy systems picked up the latest threat is classified, and Shawn Turner, spokesman for National Intelligence Director James Clapper, refused to confirm or deny Katz's analysis on how it might have happened. Intelligence officials have suggested that the plot was detected, in part at least, through NSA surveillance programs that have been under harsh worldwide criticism for privacy intrusions in the name of national security.

Source

The above are a couple of very minor snippets from a rather long article. I strongly recommend reading it. While it is al-Qaida-centric in tone, I would advice the reader to understand that all references to that specific group could be removed and any other group substituted... The articles title might clue you in on one potential substitution... People who use online forums. Given that everyone reading these words engages, on some level, with conspiracy / alt-news sites - we would all be prime targets for this sort of scrutiny.

Oddly there is a slightly older and nearly identical article also posted within the past twenty-four hours that substitutes online chat rooms for "forums'

Reading Between The Lines

Some on ATS might not be aware that the NDAA changed a very vital paradigm in the recent past. It legalized the use of propaganda, by the government, domestically. This is no small issue. It means that ethics and accountability are totally gone now - any and all lies told to us can be categorized as propaganda - for the good of national security.

Article discussing legal domestic propaganda

I believe that this news story - as well as others ( and many, many to come ) carry the fingerprints of a propaganda operation and that this is meant to marginalize and demonize anyone who might, in their search for the truth, come across an online forum - such as this one. I further believe that this may be the first step in seeking to censor interactive discussion sites that deal specifically with controversial topics by labeling them havens for terrorists and seditionists. It is my opinion that such a smear campaign would be largely effective as the majority of Internet users in the US get their news directly from the MSM propaganda machine - meaning they wouldn't care about what they perceive as the frings. As for us? We'd be told that we still could comment on MSM news sites, Youtube videos, blogs, etc.. thus seeking to nullify any First Amendment issues that could be raised. Such sites are much easier for Big Brother to put up with because the trollery and non linear nature of comments sections on most sites makes engaging in meaningful discourse nearly impossible.

Another propaganda aspect to be seen here is the following: "...the plot was detected, in part at least, through NSA surveillance programs that have been under harsh worldwide criticism for privacy intrusions..."

Guess what folks... that's Big Brother selling his evil and freedom ending spy program to the Joneses. That is the average person being told that wholesale domestic spying is good and that Americans receive a great benefit of security from it, so they should respect it - and be suspecting of all who do not view it as a necessary and wonderful thing.

That is, in no uncertain terms, brainwashing through propaganda.

The last point, which is not covered in the quotes I have used, but is covered in the article, is also pure propaganda - the discussion of privacy software and encryption tools in a manner that makes it appear suspect and undesirable.

After the NSA programs were revealed in June by former NSA systems analyst Edward Snowden, jihadi websites began urging followers to also use software that would hide their Internet protocol addresses and, essentially, prevent them from being tracked online. That aimed to add another layer of security to the online traffic.

"You can encrypt things in such a way that you can assume that even the NSA can't undo them — there's no back door," said Dan Auerbach, a technology expert at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is challenging NSA eavesdropping in federal lawsuits.

Thus is appears that the few tools we have left with which to protect ourselves are about to come under severe scrutiny. This is an absolute shame because some of us are old enough to remember the first battle fought over the legality of encryption. Not too long ago, at all, carrying a thumb drive that contained PGP - an encryption tool - on it was legally classified as "smuggling munitions across international borders" and was a major Federal offense.

How long before just having an encryption tool becomes a crime again?

Still, a bit more propaganda to help muddy it all comes directly after...

Other technology experts believe the government could access encrypted messages with the help of Internet providers.

Closing thoughts

This time around I do not have a lot to say to close with. To me this is another piece in a jigsaw puzzle that is, and has been for awhile, complete enough for us to recognize the image it portrays... Totalitarian fascism on a scale that the world has never before witnessed. A Corporate State, running the entire world with absolute power and absolute control. A puzzle that, when soon finished will look like...

Well it's about time. We've been talking about this for a long long time. It ties directly into the government anti-piracy campaign as those laws give them the same access to forums and chatsites as it does to underground networks of piracy groups. Because mostly it's one in the same.

But of course, they are talking ENCRYPTED. This forum isn't encrypted, all of these posts are indexed by google. That's the key right? The stuff they can't immediately monitor has to be the source of terrorism.

They've been pushing for a standard encryption system to which the NSA has a backdoor key, for years.

Here it comes. Good find Heff

it is about time a few million marched on washinton dc to protest this kind of spying on the people we seem to forget they are their for our benefit not we are their for their benefit offer free beer and pizza if you have to get the people out from behind their keyboards

The true first shots of war are rarely the first ones heard. I keep on wondering how this is going to snowball.

@ phishy:
But doesn't this site also have an area where you can post things that don't show up on google? I can't remember what it is called, and I think you have to have permission to post there.

That would make this site qualify wouldn't it?


This, and the email situation and everything else lately are so disheartening. And they seem to be coming faster and faster all the time.

reply to post by Hefficide


Good morning Heff, another thought provoking and enlightening thread

I mirror your sentiment with respect to the issue you have highlighted, as well a lot of us know that these public declarations can become a slippery slope. One day we could very well wake up to find that those that participate in online posting/discussion have now been labelled "person of interest" or some other derivative of the title.

However, to encourage discussion, instead of pages of support and condemnation of these actions, I would like to play devils advocate.

Momentarily putting the terrorism issue aside, if one was to think about how to effectively and efficiently communicative information that you desire to spread to your cohorts but prevent scrutiny, what better way than a digital medium no?

Technological integration has allowed for near instant transfer of information and coordination. Returning to the context of the OP, I find myself thinking about effective means of defeating ones opponent. Disruption of Enemy communications is one of the major tenants of any sound military strategy. I think this perspective is appropriate as the US has declared that this is a "war" against terrorism and one should expect these kinds of tactics to be employed.

The above being said, would it not make sense on the part of the US government to attempt to disrupt, limit, as well as intercept communications from their perceived enemies to facilitate some kind of advantage? At face value, I would say yes, this is a sound strategy.

However, this raises a contentious issue as highlighted by Heff, the perception of "who is the enemy" has grown in scope to encompass almost anyone who uses and computer.

Now whether or not terrorism is being used as a pretense to strip away freedoms and privacy, I cannot say. However, in light of the position I have decided to take on this opening post I would like to ask which scenario seems more plausible; The US government is using terrorism and peoples fear to further institute a policy of widespread surveillance and allow for an overall degradation of ones rights and freedoms OR that the government is truly afraid that the potential exists for an organization, using a digital medium for communication to plan, coordinate and perpetrate some form of harm against the US or its allies?

Occam's Razor; sometimes the simplest explanation could be the right one. The level of conspiracy suggested here would imply that this would have been in the works for decades and span careers and generations of people. Is it more likely that this "crusade" against our liberties has existed and been perpetuated for the last 50-80 years to the present or that the current situation is the result of poorly thought out and over generalized policies hoping to prevent the tide of violence from spreading to US shores?

bah, this internet is screwed.

Time to get on board a new one



Link

We the people are expected to be "transparent" in our communications or we are considered "terrorists". We can't expect privacy for ourselves, yet the government keeps it's secrets and feeds us legal propaganda? The duplicity is obvious, "Do as we say, not as we do."

I was lead to believe that I was born a "citizen" with rights as such. It was a government by the people, for the people, at least that is the story they told us. I can't possibly believe that anymore. It was propaganda then and it's propaganda now. We have been getting glimpses behind the curtain thanks to the whistle blowers and CT "nuts" and what we have seen is a naked government that is really ugly without its clothes and no make-up on.

reply to post by Hefficide

The above are a couple of very minor snippets from a rather long article. I strongly recommend reading it. While it is al-Qaida-centric in tone, I would advice the reader to understand that all references to that specific group could be removed and any other group substituted... The articles title might clue you in on one potential substitution... People who use online forums. Given that everyone reading these words engages, on some level, with conspiracy / alt-news sites - we would all be prime targets for this sort of scrutiny.

I read the article. I don't know how you drew that conclusion. What special scrutiny? We all know that the internet is being monitored so how is this information new?

And I don''t see how this article suggests anything with relation to people who use online forums in general, in any way we were not aware of yet.

Guess what folks... that's Big Brother selling his evil and freedom ending spy program to the Joneses. That is the average person being told that wholesale domestic spying is good and that Americans receive a great benefit of security from it, so they should respect it - and be suspecting of all who do not view it as a necessary and wonderful thing. That is, in no uncertain terms, brainwashing through propaganda.

The government trying to justify its actions. Just like one would expect.

Thus is appears that the few tools we have left with which to protect ourselves are about to come under severe scrutiny. This is an absolute shame because some of us are old enough to remember the first battle fought over the legality of encryption. Not too long ago, at all, carrying a thumb drive that contained PGP - an encryption tool - on it was legally classified as "smuggling munitions across international borders" and was a major Federal offense.

How do you get to this conclusion? Just because a few articles are talking about encryption used by extremists?

I see no evidence for this.

I also don't see how this would present a threat to sites like ATS.

I think your conclusions are based on some very loose connections.

Thus is appears that the few tools we have left with which to protect ourselves are about to come under severe scrutiny.

What tools? Encryption software and IP hiders?

Do you use them to protect yourself from the government?

Again, what is your evidence that these mechanisms have come under severe scrutiny?

reply to post by chiefsmom


Haha you are right, I forgot as I'm not special enough to have access to... um is it beyond above top secret? super duper top secret party time?

But yeah, you are right, as well, we can send private messages that aren't publicly viewable, so we're all terrorists.

there's no doubt they've been watching ATS. If they did try to pressure the owners to give them full access, they'd be under a gag order like Lavabit so who knows what they'd be able to tell us.

Can anyone of the posters in this thread specify as to what part of the source articles their replies are aimed at?

I see a lot of the generic "government control of internet bad" replies (which it is), but how do these responses relate to the OP and its articles exactly?

I don't see it.

reply to post by PleiadanString

Again, what is your evidence that these mechanisms have come under severe scrutiny?

Lavabit.

Lavabit Unlikely to Reopen

Levison – accompanied by his lawyer during the video interview – said he is legally unable to talk about the full circumstances of his decision to shut down Lavabit, which had 410,000 registered users when it closed last week.

"I can't talk about that. I would like to, believe me. I think if the American public knew what our government was doing, they wouldn't be allowed to do it any more," said Levison, who described the closure as "the lesser of two evils".

"There's information that I can't even share with my lawyer, let alone with the American public. So if we're talking about secrecy, you know, it's really been taken to the extreme," he said.

As we're learning more specifics it's becoming clear. Encrypted communications is the next target, because they already have access to everything else.

What's "new" is the fact that it's starting, it's no longer talk. And the anti-terror apparatus gives them unlimited, unmonitored, access to whatever they want. That's the key.

As some of us have been warning for a very very long time, once you link people who talk online to terrorists, because terrorists *could* use those methods, we're all doomed.

They even want access to chats within games, think about that, send a turn of Draw Something to a friend with a message, and they want access to read it.

If lavabit doesn't get it into your head what's coming, nothing will. The only method of securing your communications is encryption. IP hiders? you mean like vpns and such? Not worth crap for a few reasons:

1. they are monitoring from the ISP level
2. if those sites are hosting in the US, they HAVE to retain your data and hand it over, and more than likely are legally bound from telling you they do, or did.

encryption is the only means of secure communication, that's why the NSA wants 1 standard encryption, to which they have the key. That's why this PRISM program went and worked with companies that provide encrypted communications, because they can't decrypt that traffic. They have it, but it's worthless. So they cut deals with the companies. The big boys all played ball, some of the smaller ones, like Lavabit decided to just call it quits.

Because they see what's coming down the pipe.

reply to post by PleiadanString


My feelings are not based upon a single article at all. My feelings are informed by many factors, over a period of years. As it happens these incursions into cyber-freedoms are currently happening at a much greater pace than at any time in the past and are becoming nearly a daily issue.

What began as an argument, some 15-20 years ago, about piracy has now blossomed into a very, very dangerous assault upon the Internet and the inherent freedoms that have always been a part of it. Forget Snowden and the NSA leaks - as informed people have known about wholesale domestic electronic spying for at least ten years. But pay close attention to recent events - the arresting of quite a number of people for FB posts, the closing down of secure and encrypted email services, the roundabout admission that TOR has been compromised, the still extant hidden spyware in Microsoft products, and a myriad of other issues and the picture becomes crystal clear - especially when combined with changes to US laws regarding digital communications with regard to the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

For a long time this community was marginalized because the propaganda tended to paint us as nutters. A largely unfair label on its own, but one that left us only marginalized. Now the rhetoric is becoming more hostile and alienating.

I stand by my OP as rational and valid.

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


That will easily be squashed...

A simple FCC change of rules when it comes to broadcasting standards, and you'd have to be licensed to operate a node.

A guy who used to work in the same department setup something similar to get broadband speeds to his remote hunting camp, using antennas that technically are illegal, which is why they were pulled from the schools, he was able to link his home broadband to his remote camp with decent speeds.

One or two of them might go unnoticed, but trying to replace the internet with it? Never gonna happen, you'd be better off funding your own satellite access.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters

Lavabit.

See that is evidence.

The OP didn't mention it though.

I am not shocked about the whole thing because I have been assuming that every bit of information is being monitored, for years anyway.

The "first shot" was fired years ago.

I mean the fact that one would need encryption software to have a secure communication in the first place is just as tellling as this news that they are trying to work around it. It is to be expected.

reply to post by Hefficide

My feelings are not based upon a single article at all. My feelings are informed by many factors, over a period of years. As it happens these incursions into cyber-freedoms are currently happening at a much greater pace than at any time in the past and are becoming nearly a daily issue.

If you make claims in your OP one would at least expect the enclosed sources to back up these claims directly.

Otherwise you are just speculating.

reply to post by PleiadanString


New account trolling?

Perhaps offering some sources you feel are pertinent would be more beneficial to the discussion at hand. Also an opinion would be good. From what I can decern, your position is to kick-back and watch what things unfold as it is to be expect...? Perhaps you can elaborate on this and why you feel this to be so?

reply to post by MDDoxs

New account trolling?

Yes, you seem to be trolling my new account.

Wth is wrong with you?

I am asking reasonable questions about the OP. I made it clear what my problem was with the OP.

I asked for evidence for the claims.

Another poster gave me an answer.

His answer was not one of the points in the OP.

I found the answer acceptable.

What does this say about the OP?

reply to post by PleiadanString

Yes, you seem to be trolling my new account.

No, I am not trolling you and I apologize if you feel that I am.

Wth is wrong with you?

Nothing is wrong with me, thank you for the concern. Is everything alright with you?

I am asking reasonable questions about the OP. I made it clear what my problem was with the OP.

No, what you are doing is an attempt to go off-topic and offer nothing constructive. I apologize to Heff as well, as I seem to have indulged you in this.

I asked for evidence of the claims.

Look closer, and you will see relevant information in the initial OP. Furthermore, If you take the time to review some of the articles written by Heff, you would know he is well informed.

Another poster gave me an answer.

Indeed they did. It was a very informative and constructive post.

His answer was not one of the points in the OP.

I am glad you found it valuable, but it would be quite an attempt to post every link pertaining to this topic in a single thread.

I found the answer acceptable.

Knowledge is power I am glad it met your standards.

What does this say about the OP?

Why are you concerned about the OP? I have had the pleasure of reading his articles and discussing issues of interest with him.

Heff, I apologize for the somewhat off topic post, but I am sure this individuals attitudes mirrors the sentiments of the population at large with regards to the topic at hand.

Originally posted by PleiadanString
[

What does this say about the OP?

It says the OP was discussing something that, while including Lavabit ( among many other things ), was not specific to it.