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.

 

The Propaganda War Against Us: The First Shot Is Fired

page: 2
107
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
We'll be the new NK in no time if we keep this up.



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 





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


You were suggesting that I am a troll.

If I'm correct the rules do not allow this.

My point was very simple.

The OP made claims which he presented no evidence for.

I pointed this out.

The only piece of evidence that actually backs up the claims made by the OP, was not in the OP.

That fact alone justifies my criticism.

That was all.

##snipped##

If someone makes a claim I expect them to back it up.

Again, as soon as real evidence was posted by another poster I accepted it.

Are you saying that the OP did actually offer proof? Please qoute.






edit on 15-8-2013 by PleiadanString because: (no reason given)

edit on Thu Aug 15 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: Go After the Ball, Not the Player!



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

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.


The lavabit situation is the only thing in this thread that actually proves your claim that "encryption software has come under heavy scrutiny".

Talk about how extremists use encryption software in an article is not evidence for that claim.

The fact that lavabit was shutdown because the owner didn't want to comply with government intrusion, is.

Can you please qoute the parts in your OP that you feel prove your claims?

Off course I will be accused of trolling and derailing but as long as people don't want to admit that the OP was lacking in proof and attack me for pointing it out, it is your own faults.
edit on 15-8-2013 by PleiadanString because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by PleiadanString
 


My OP relied upon the idea that people reading it would be somewhat informed of recent events and that a rehash of many other threads and topics would not be necessary and would, in fact, be rather superfluous.

Your concerns have been noted and addressed, I hope adequately.



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I think that shot was already fired.Note that political extremism is the first words of the summary report. This report is 32 pages long, worth reading.


Political extremists and terrorists are using the internet as an instrument for radicalisation and recruitment. This report – resulting from the first systematic effort to bring together industry, experts and government on the issue of online radicalisation – examines what can be done by governments, industry and civil society to counter their activities.

The report thus develops concrete proposals for action within
each of the four strands:

•Deterring producers

The selective use of takedowns in conjunction with prosecutions would signal that individuals engaged in online extremism are not beyond the law.

• Empowering online communities

The creation of an Internet Users Panel in order to strengthen reporting mechanisms and complaints procedures would allow users to make their voices heard.

• Reducing the appeal

More attention must be paid to media literacy and a comprehensive approach in this area is badly needed.

• Promoting positive messages

The establishment of an independent start-up fund would provide seed money for grassroots online projects aimed at countering extremism.

Efforts to counter online radicalisation must view new technologies and modes of interaction not as a threat but as an opportunity. Relying on government alone is not sufficient. It is vital to capitalize upon the potential contributions of all stakeholders, including internet companies and internet users.


icsr.info... Note that they have already capitalized on internet companies and stakeholders.... this was a 2009 report.

This is brought to you by:

About ICSR:

The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence (ICSR) is a unique partnership in which King’s College London, the University of Pennsylvania, the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya (Israel) and the
Regional Center for Conflict Prevention Amman (Jordan) are equal stakeholders.

The aim and mission of ICSR is to bring together knowledge and leadership to counter the growth of radicalisation and political violence
edit on 15-8-2013 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-8-2013 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 09:55 AM
link   
 




 



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


The mesh network 'Guifi' in Spain is doing pretty well, the network now has more than 21,000 wireless nodes, spanning much of Catalonia.

They seem to be getting away with it.



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Of coarse this will become the reason why the NSA needs to spy on us all!
The truth is I have no problem with the NSA going after legitimate sites that are
encrypted but there is no reason why they need to monitor web sites like ATS
and others that are trying to find out the truth to what kind of world we are living in!
There only real reason would be to find out how well their campaign of disinformation
is going and what part of reality us truthers have deciphered!



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Well it's not like we couldn't see this coming!

Freedom is becoming rather a rare commodity these days as we continue to allow our respective Governments to lead us down the path toward sheer and utter totalitarianism.

Some might say complete and utterly Orwellian.

Sad really!



edit on 15-8-2013 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by MichiganSwampBuck
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.
edit on 15-8-2013 by MichiganSwampBuck because: typo


Who watches the watchers? They watch each other.

We are all being watched, including the politicians and the civil servants. We are all under the microscope, we just have less to lose.

This is a contemporary example of a pancopticon prison.



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 11:24 AM
link   
ah it doesnt matter, I could'nt be bothered.

edit on 15-8-2013 by Lady_Tuatha because: retype



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Op written and said well.

Unfortunately, I think we are already the belly of the beast we just can't see it yet.

There was first, some of you young folks weren’t here, the war on crime.
There they started monitoring the money you could put in the bank because of the supposed drug money floating around. If you put 10 grand in a bank it had to be reported. Stuff like that was initiated which correlated with the next phony war, the war on drugs.
These were the Nixon era fake wars

These eras melded with the proceeding presidencies of Carter, Reagan (a big war on crime and drugs phony) and then a real big push on “ the war on drugs” under first Bush regime and the Clinton era where all kinds of draconian stuff was done under the “ war on drugs” banner. Clinton was the first to initiate the fake war on terror and left it to be done in spades under the beast Bush and Obama, the two-headed dragon of the apocalypse.


Finally, the final big “war on something” of course we all know came about under the 2nd Bush regime that is the “war on terror” the biggest hoax in history.

The war on terror is likely to be used as the final push on these fake “war on stuff” hoaxes where soon they will begin the final and last war and that will be the...

“War on the American people.”

edit on 15-8-2013 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 
Dang it Heff, couldn't you give me some good news this morning?


All kidding aside we've seen this coming, heck it's already been going on for a while- they're only just now admitting what we've already known for a long time. Thanks for bringing it out to the forefront for those who may still be a little sleepy eyed. This is their wake up call!



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by littled16
 





they're only just now admitting what we've already known for a long time.


Who is admitting what with regards to what?



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by PleiadanString


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.





If you believe this, why argue with the OP?

Meh.....



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by PleiadanString
 
Admitting that yes, there are people monitoring public forums and that though the terms troll, shill and disinfo agent get flung about liberally at places like ATS that there actually ARE those living up to those titles. Yes, the articles use extremist groups as example but if you look around at what is being defined as extremist and potential terrorist nowdays the definitions aren't quite as well defined as they once were. Posting on an internet forum anything other than agreement with popular pro-government memes these days could potentially cause one to fit withing the defined parameters of either.



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by littled16
 


Who admitted that and where, and what was admitted that we didn't know before this thread, exactly?




Posting on an internet forum anything other than agreement with popular pro-government memes these days could potentially cause one to fit withing the defined parameters of either.


Nothing in those articles suggests that. Nothing.


edit on 15-8-2013 by PleiadanString because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 





If you believe this, why argue with the OP? Meh.....


Sigh, that's aggrevating.

I guess you are not able to argue multiple angles or add some nuance to a notion you might agree with overall.

The point is that the claims made were not backed up by anything solid and that the thread was presented in a way that makes it overly dramatic.

I already pointed this out very clearly yet it still is a mystery to some apperently.

Meh? Isn't that what sheep usually say?



posted on Aug, 15 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by PleiadanString
 
If you wish to argue just for the sake of argument and debate there is an excellent forum for that here:
Debate Forum
Playing off ignorance for the sake of argument and taking point as "Devil's Advocate" will serve you well there. Here? Meh....not so much.



new topics

top topics



 
107
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join