could gvn't operatives be posting bogus threads just to distract us?

I mean just when someone posts something seriously profound, we get blasted with dozens upon dozens of meaningless drivel and filler type posts.

Where's the Beef?

How much more transparent does it have to be?

Of course. Dissemination of bad information has always been a tactic of expending your opponents energies on dead ends.

reply to post by skyshow


I think it's quite possible, we should keep it in mind. If I was the government I would certainly try to create a 'conspiracy of conspiracies' so-to-speak so people would know what the truth really was!

By placing false information along side the real it becomes hard to tell the difference, especially regarding such speculative topics.

Disinfo agents are everywhere in ATS. After a while you will be able to spot disinfo from a mile away. When I suspect a disinfo agent, I mark them as my foe, just so I don't forget that they may be dirty.

Originally posted by downtown436
Disinfo agents are everywhere in ATS. After a while you will be able to spot disinfo from a mile away. When I suspect a disinfo agent, I mark them as my foe, just so I don't forget that they may be dirty.

OHGHHHHH you suspect the same onei suspect....maybe im not that overly paranoid after all.

Maybe there should be some kind of sticky thread listing suspected agents? And a place to give them a chance to prove they're not!

Though I guess it would be hard to ever prove someone was an agent so I guess in the end you just have to be vigilant about the boards, maybe tell a mod if you get really suspicious of someone.

Originally posted by GrooveCat
maybe tell a mod if you get really suspicious of someone.

Unless the member is violating the T&C, there's nothing a mod will do, or should do. For that matter, everyone's posts should be subject to identical perceptual, critical, and skeptical filters. "Witch hunts", or some junior varsity "McCarthyism", has no place here.

As to the topic.....I seriously don't think they'd bother with the relatively small impact ATS has on the general population. This is a unique population here. Carefully worded press releases and statements to the main stream media have a far greater audience with a potential for greater impact.

reply to post by MrPenny


MrPenny may be right, they'd more likely to concentrate on the mainstream. Still if they wanted to nip the problem in the bud ATS would be a good place to do so! You can never be too careful!

Can someone define a dis-info agent?

I only ask because I have seen many a thread consisting of a believer and someone who is skeptical of that belief. When the skeptical person tries to make a point/ voice their opinion they are called 'dis-info agents'. In short I just feel ATS's deny ignorance should apply on both sides- not just the believers.

reply to post by Knights


You could call trolls disinfo agents, if you expanded the concept a little.

[edit on 12-4-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]

There is an entire topic devoted to this and can be found on the home page here.

Psuedo Skeptics are also covered there.

Yes i totally believe it and i totally believe they are here, and there are many of them (or a few that use a few different nicks). You can see them. They came in force not tooooo long ago. there are a few things to loook for that give them away thoroughly and clearly ;-P

Yeah, anything is possible.

But honestly they don't have to because we already do it for them.

Let's face it, with the kind of exposure that ATS attracts, not to mention the prospect of additional video, radio and TV networking, it would be rather surprising if those that actually control content are not already under some kind of pressure from certain interested parties.

Be under no illusion, if worldwide communications are monitored for certain key words and phrases, then most certainly it will be somebody's job to closely monitor sites such as this.

Everybody wave now

As has already been suggested, obfuscation and confusion caused by misinformation en masse is an old and common tactic. Conversley, it could help us to identify areas that are deemed potentially sensitive. However, these days, I would suggest that a quiet word from certain agencies to those in control would now have the desired effect. I'm not suggesting that ATS have 'sold out', it's just that it is likely in some ways, to be a victim of its own meteoric success.

Originally posted by MrPenny
As to the topic.....I seriously don't think they'd bother with the relatively small impact ATS has on the general population. This is a unique population here.

Personally I think you highly underestimate ATS and the people who are aware of it.

If I had an agenda I would promote it here.

But I don't so I will continue to use my own perception and instincts and seperate honest discussion from hidden agendas.

I really liked what a poster mentioned earlier about the energy drain on certain subjects, that is why I don't go to the 9/11 threads and why I should stay out of the chemtrail threads!!!

While I feel that it is a good possibility that the government might be monitoring ATS I don't believe there is a program to place dis-info agents on ATS. It would make sense that the government would monitor posts since it is a large forum with free membership. I know that if i wanted to covertly pass along information to others without getting caught I would make posts on a free forum that seemed harmless. As long as my associates had the correct key for decryption nobody would be the wiser.

For the government to be spending time and resources on planting members on the forum to just give out dis-info seems pointless. The only people reading it are people already curious about the subjects. Dis-info is better suited to a wider base of reach to the public like tv, radio, newspapers and magazines.

If reading these forums has taught me anything it is that a lot of people, both skeptics and believers, have made up their mind about what the think on subjects.

Originally posted by interestedalways
Personally I think you highly underestimate ATS and the people who are aware of it.

Nah, I think my estimation is pretty close.....as I type this, there are 224 registered users on ATS right now. I know, there are many more surfers, lurkers, and other unregistered users viewing some of these pages....but really, do the math.....it's a tiny little slice of the population viewing any particular thread at any time.

I'd like everyone to state their opinion on just what they think a disinfo agant is. Is it bacause I, and many others dont' believe in all the wild consipracies flying for everything that labels us "disinfo"? Or just because we don't agree with some wild claims?

I think the word you should use is skeptic, a skeptic being someone that won't take something as face value just because someone sais it's so...I, as a skeptic, look into things and make up my own mind.

If I'm some sort of disinfo agent, I'm still waiting for my pay cheque from the NWO, CIA, FBI or whoever it is you think these disinfo agents are working for.

reply to post by MrPenny


The Stats page would perhaps be another way to analyse the maths. However, this a forum where information is often drawn from other established sources and then commented on by those who are generally better informed on the subject. What better way to 'test the water' on particular issues.

Also, many of the serious subjects discussed are often distributed to other forums throughout the world - and vice versa. When you're asleep in your bed, these discussions continue elsewhere.

Granted, we do see an awful lot of emotive garbage, but this is a free forum where everyone has the right to their point of view. However, I have recognised where serious threads have actually pre-empted events prior to mainstream media exposure. It is here where official interest will observe comment and response to issues that cannot be openly discussed. The UFO problem is a perfect example of how we demonstrate some kind of public perception.

I think it would make sense to monitor this site and even put a few well placed skeptics would not be really too much trouble for them. They allready have the MSM locked down real tight, if the MSM reports on anything conspiracy like they say as little as possible and never dwell on it. No if they really are trying to control the content that the public gets, websites like this are obviously their next place of concentration. We've all seen that one skeptic that just adamantely refuses to see it our way no matter how much proof you supply, it's those kinds of people that make me wonder. But then again people in general are really stubborn.