Dear Reuters: This Is NOT How You Report On Dishonest, Disingenuous Talking Points From US Officials Regarding Encryption
from the come-on-guys dept
Attorney General William Barr and his DOJ and FBI have really ramped up their bullshit campaign against the public being able to use encryption. President Trump himself weighed in himself with some ignorant statements, suggesting that Apple owes him some sort of quid pro quo, because his policies may have helped them on trade:
We are helping Apple all of the time on TRADE and so many other issues, and yet they refuse to unlock phones used by killers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements. They will have to step up to the plate and help our great Country, NOW!
This is dumb and wrong for many, many reasons. First of all, no matter what the US government has done on an unrelated issue, that doesn't mean that Apple should do something on a totally different issue. Second, the issue is not Apple "refusing to unlock phones used by killers, drug dealers and other violent criminal elements." It's Apple offering encryption that protects all of us. It is not possible for Apple to "unlock" the phones of criminals without doing so for everyone else as well, putting everyone's information at tremendous risk. And, for very little benefit, seeing as there are multiple private companies who have figure out how to crack iPhone encryption and which the DOJ and other law enforcement agencies are already using.
Indeed, outside of the President and the DOJ, other parts of the federal government have come down against having Apple break encryption, including the intelligence community and the Defense Department who recently told Congress how important general purpose consumer encryption is in protecting national security.
But, because only the other side of the debate seems to get any attention, and because Trump toady's feel the need to kiss up to the President, now we have Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, also repeating nonsense about Apple and encryption:
“I understand the president’s view, and it is absolutely critical for our technology companies to cooperate with law enforcement,” Mnuchin told CNBC in an interview.
Mnuchin later told reporters at the White House that he had not discussed the issue with Apple and did not know the specifics at hand. “I know Apple has cooperated in the past on law enforcement issues, and I expect they would continue ... to cooperate.”
Damn straight he doesn't "understand the specifics at hand." Still, political grifters spewing nonsense is nothing new. What frustrates me is how Reuters framed this story. Its headline blared: "Mnuchin urges Apple, other technology companies to work with U.S. law enforcement"
That's really bad framing, because it suggests to basically everyone (totally incorrectly) that the issue here is that Apple and other tech companies are somehow not "working with U.S. law enforcement." Except they are. Where possible and where reasonable and allowed by law. The issue at play when it comes to encryption literally has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not tech companies should or should not "work with" law enforcement, but rather whether they should put all of our security at risk, in order to make it marginally easier in a few limited cases for law enforcement to get into phones it probably already has access to through other means.
When framed that way, it's obviously dumb. But anyone reading Reuters' coverage of the issue won't get that. They'll think that Apple is somehow taking some sort of stand against US law enforcement. This is what Trump, Barr, and apparently Mnuchin, would like people to think, but it's not true, and it's fundamentally bad journalism for Reuters to frame it that way.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: doj, donald trump, encryption, going dark, law enforcement, security, steve mnuchin, william barr
Companies: apple, reuters
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Translation
When they say "work with law enforcement", what they really mean is "cave in on your principles".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Translation
It starts with break encryption on a phone on demand, becomes provide the DHS the ability to break into any phone at the border, and then allow all cops to break any phone with equipment in their cat of their cars
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I agree, that was totally the wrong headline for Reuters to use. It should have been, "Mnuchin Urges Apple, Other Technology Companies To Bend Over And Pretend They Like It".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All the sides
This is what happens when journalists think that there are only two sides to a circle. Complex issues like this are framed in ways that shut down healthy discussions and hide non-trivial solutions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You do the math
Many journalists work for corporations, and many corporations have financial interests affected by what journalists write.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You do the math
That is not a journalist then. That's just editorial staff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So?
If having obviously dumb political statements framed as obviously dumb were a common desire, Fox News would be out of a business model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
change the narrative
"Barr demands Apple make the iPhone his boss, Trump, uses for tweeting be made hackable by Chinese,Russian, and other hackers."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Follow the yellow brick road to hell, paved with good intentions
Did anyone else read that as Steve Munchkin? Then who is the wicked witch of the west?🧙♀️ Man, he must have had a hard time at school.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Metadata
And, for very little benefit, seeing as there are multiple private companies who have figure out how to crack iPhone encryption and which the DOJ and other law enforcement agencies are already using.
Regardless of whether Saudi student pilot/terrorist Mohammed Alshamrani phone's data was encrypted DOJ and other law enforcement agencies still had access to all of it's associated metadata which would have shown who/when/where/duration of all calls/texts that were sent/received.
Mohammed Alshamrani as a foreigner (ie Saudi national) attending naval flight school at Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida and would have been a prime candidate for more intrusive electronic surveillance by the boys/girls at NSA.
Mohammed Alshamrani's terror attack is simply another emergency that the US government is attempting to exploit in order to accumulate even greater power and eliminate strong personal device data encryption.
The question Americans need to be asking is why are we training Saudi nationals as military pilots (etc) while Saudi Arabia (US too) is committing war crimes in Yemen.
Additionally why is the US governments vetting process of foreign nationals attending advanced military training so weak?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Metadata
Additionally why is the US governments vetting process of foreign nationals attending advanced military training so weak?
1) life is complex
2) they are so self-impressed with their theater that they think their security works
3)it doesn't matter, we have a deal with Sa'ud because reasons
4)on purpose so they can exploit emergencies
5)mix and match
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Metadata
Did it occur to you that extreme vetting entails forms of hazing / harassment/entrapment /blackmail that are seldom discussed in the MSM?
Like the US /FVEYs child porn program for example, as a tool of compromise?
“William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography”
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.ht ml
I mean - WTF is had contact with? You would think that a bunch of alleged jihadis who possess child porn would be a GREAT CASE for the DOJ, right?
Oooops. Except that they didnt possess it, someone else with information DID.
So, instead, they are deporting these guys......
Hmmm...
had contact with....WTF is THAT exactly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Metadata
It’s almost like all the shit you talk about never actually happened and thats the reason no one knows about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Metadata
“William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography”
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.ht ml
I mean - WTF is had contact with?
Care to answer that, AC?
You would think the feds,would be ALLTHEFUCKOVER prosecuting some c -porn hoarding jihadis, right?
But thats not what happened here, for some reason
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Metadata
That isn’t really evidence of anything nefarious. I mean, they weren’t trying to prosecute these people, just see if they should be allowed to continue to stay/study on a US military base. The jihadist and anti-American stuff was probably sufficient for that. Also, I note that the article never says that the 21 Saudis removed were all the Saudis studying there. You also don’t really allege any particular nefarious or improper motive here that is supported by evidence.
Honestly, the evidence you provided doesn’t really support nefarious or improper motives over perfectly reasonable or benign motives on the part of the government in this particular incident. Barring something more, we kinda have to lean towards the less malicious theory, particularly given that you’re alleging that this is evidence of a trend or conspiracy rather than an isolated incident, so it gets increased scrutiny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Metadata
While I agree that child pornography—while bad—is over-criminalized, and I do have some questions about this particular action, there are a few things you’re missing.
These were foreign students studying at a US military base. There didn’t need to be criminal charges to deport them; they were essentially on a temporary VISA that could be revoked for a number of reasons, including security concerns. And since they were on a military base, standards are higher than for most foreign students studying in the US.
The DOJ doesn’t typically bother with criminal charges if deportations are possible without them, and I don’t really see any significant criminal charges here anyway given the apparently limited interaction with child porn they had.
I think the biggest concern here was the jihadist and anti-American material. I don’t think the child porn played a major role in the decision to deport them. Also, note that Barr made it clear that there is no evidence that they were actually planning anything in particular or had advanced knowledge of the shooting. This is essentially cleaning house to prevent a possible repeat.
Seriously, you’re making me actually agree with and defend Barr on something. That’s just crazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Metadata
"Regardless of whether Saudi student pilot/terrorist Mohammed Alshamrani phone's data was encrypted DOJ and other law enforcement agencies still had access to all of it's associated metadata which would have shown who/when/where/duration of all calls/texts that were sent/received. "
But that requires, you know, footwork, and isn't as sexy as simply being able to lift the data straight from every phone in existence. It also denies Barr that "Edgar J. Hoover" power trip he's been hungry for ever since he joined law enforcement.
"Mohammed Alshamrani as a foreigner (ie Saudi national) attending naval flight school at Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida and would have been a prime candidate for more intrusive electronic surveillance by the boys/girls at NSA. "
You would have thought that the keywords "saudi", "extremist", and "flight school" would have triggered something or other in an alphabet soup agency after 9/11, yes. So why didn't it?
"The question Americans need to be asking is why are we training Saudi nationals as military pilots (etc) while Saudi Arabia (US too) is committing war crimes in Yemen."
The answer is the same as when the FBI were asked to back off from the known saudi extremists then learning to pilot airliners in US schools. As well as the answer as to why days after 9/11 FBI agents actually escorted numerous saudis still on the terror watch list on to flights back to saudi arabia.
The US shale oil boom notwithstanding the US still isn't completely self-sufficient on oil and saudi arabia is one of the biggest sources still. Add that to the historical Saudi benevolence when it comes to being a US air base in the middle east and you end up with the saudis being literal untouchables as far as US law enforcement is concerned.
That's why a gang of scions of Saudi Arabias most influential families can hijack a plane and drive it right into a US skyscraper without a single harsh word aimed at Saudi Arabia - whose embassies in the US was helping Bin Laden coordinate the act - and why the saud family can send a bunch of thugs to murder and dismember a journalist in turkey without a single strong word offered by the white house.
It's not rocket science.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Metadata
Maybe, dig deeper, bro.
I would like your honest opinion: whats up with that US /FVEY child porn distribution program anyways?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
Any thoughts about the child pornography extreme vetting programs used by our governments against unsuspecting immigrants?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Metadata
That story explains nothing about a so-called “US/FVEY child porn distribution program”. Also, these were foreign students on a US military base. I’d expect there to be a stricter vetting program for such. In fact, this isn’t even “vetting”. “Vetting” would be something done beforehand. This is an investigation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Metadata
"I would like your honest opinion: whats up with that US /FVEY child porn distribution program anyways?"
Completely irrelevant since the way US law enforcement and military have set up their judiciary and organizational tools, "being brown in public", "having the wrong name", and "born in the wrong place" is quite enough to land anyone on a list running the whole gamut from "frisk at every opportunity" through "no-fly" to "shoot on sight".
They have no need to frame you for CP when they can use any version of six degrees of separation to imply you're running a sex trafficking/terrorist ring and/or have a history of mental disability without any effort needed at all.
You gotta love what a series of inept politicians grasping for fear and uncertainty to retain power can do to what ought to have been decent jurisprudens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not like it would be difficult
It's not like it would even be hard to come up with more accurate alternatives, so they've really got no excuse.
"Mnuchin urges Apple, other technology companies to cripple encryption that hundreds of millions depend upon."
"Mnuchin urges Apple, other technology companies to break encryption vital to the public, likely to no real gain."
"Mnuchin urges Apple, other technology companies to undermine security of hundreds of millions."
"Mnuchin urges Apple, other technology companies to make the public more vulnerable to criminals."
Any of those would have been vastly more accurate than what they went with, and wouldn't have left them looking like stooges who just repeated what they were told.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And to think we once fought a war against people who believed the purpose of industry was to serve the greater glory of the State.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:Opinion
Hi, General.
I would like your honest opinion: whats up with that US /FVEY child porn distribution program anyways?
Was that a “thing” in your era too, or just a relic of 1950s era MKULTRA psywar?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
I mean, considering your mysterious death in 1945, I think you might have a good second opinion, and I could use some help on this conspiracy theory I was working on a few weeks ago, before my own odd death....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:Opinion
Replying to yourself is almoat as stupid as the shit hamiltron says.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:Opinion on almoat
“Almoat ” as stupid as....?
Yeah, thought so. I almoat sed thit mysilf.
But:
I would like your honest opinion: whats up with that US /FVEY child porn distribution program anyways?
Was that a “thing” in your era too, or just a relic of 1950s era MKULTRA psywar?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
I mean, considering your mysterious death in 1945, I think you might have a good second opinion, and I could use some help on this conspiracy theory I was working on a few weeks ago, before my own odd death....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:Opinion on racist shitbags
Bro you really shouldn’t be throwing stones in the misspelling department. But you conspiracy nutters are nothing if not massive hypocrites.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Opinion on almoat chatbots
Yeah, you might almoat make sense with your racist AI chatbot schtick if it wasnt your own projection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Opinion on almoat chatbots
Please explain the allegations of racism. I don’t see any mention or implication of race or racially charged language in anything this particular AC said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:Opinion on almoat chatbots
Also, I think you’ve officially driven this joke to the ground. Once was enough, if not more than enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:Opinion
Almoat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:Opinion
Stop posting this same thing over and over again. It doesn’t really have much to do with the topic anyway. Just post it once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
REAL ENCRYPTION
Hey you want to see REAL encryption?
https://babylonbee.com/
This is TRUTH encrypted as HUMOR!
It's HILARIOUS (if you can decode it).
I'm guessing the leftists HERE and too STUUUPIID to even UNDERSTAND it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: REAL ENCRYPTION
They would probably understand it better than trolls WHO SHOUT and don't spell properly in a poor attempt to do satire. Doesn't work, o ye of little brain - and probably even less faith.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can understand it. It‘s shitty conservative humor that wants to compete with The Onion but barely rises above the level of The 1/2 Hour News Hour, a 2007 Fox News ripoff of The Daily Show that lasted less than a year.
The difference between conservative humor and all other humor is that conservative humor centers everyone else as the “victims” of the joke. It lacks the self-awareness necessary for, and willingness to work with, self-depricating humor. Just look at Donald Trump: His “jokes” about himself are never about his (many, many) failings, but about how he’s awesome compared to everyone else in the world.
Conservative humor revels in abject cruelty to those viewed as “enemies” by conservative humorists. You see it in every Twitter asshole with a MAGA icon that mocks “SJWs”, “snowflakes”, transgender people, feminists, atheists, and all other conservative cultural boogeymen. You see it taken to its logical endgame with racist, sexist, and otherwise bigoted jokes that would fit in on 8chan or Stormfront. But such cruelty delights only the similarly cruel. That is why conservative humor rarely hits the mainstream unless it’s packaged in the most inoffensive way (e.g., a network sitcom like Last Man Standing): Only cruel people want to promote the humor of cruelty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: REAL ENCRYPTION
So do you get money promoting that shit ass website or do you do it for free?
Not sure which in is worse bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: REAL ENCRYPTION
Cis
idiotstick
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: WOMP WOMP
hashtag fuck your feelings bro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And here we have proof positive that you:
A. Don't know what encryption is.
B. Don't actually understand that site you link to.
C. Don't understand humor.
D. Wouldn't know truth if it slapped you in the face with a wet fish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: that didn’t take long bro
stupid*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear cnn,msnbc,abc, and cbs...
No one knows corruption better than those who create it. I give you the ANALCRATS.
With their ears full of "it" so they can't hear anything that might disagree, and a single point of view, see them line up and fight for evolutionary suicide.
There comes a point where what you have chosen reveals itself for the obvious dead end that it always was. And you have no where else to go but to face the consequences of your choice.
Isn't that right? nancyadamchucketaway
just waiting for their pink slips. not the ones they wear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its simple ,apple protects the public privacy by using encryption ,
soldier,s ,engineers, members of the senate, the navy, the nsa,
also use iphone,s would it be a good thing if their phones could be hacked by china or russia or other bad actors ?
no it would be a massive security risk.The nsa have acess to phone record,s
browsing data ,sms data used by drug dealers and other criminal,s .when more finacial transactions are carried out by phones,
and tablets breaking encyrption would be a disaster for the american economy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reuters is a disgrace
Really old media has proven itself unified in publishing complete and utter crap against 'Big Tech' as they blame it for their downfall, not seeing that the real culprit can be found in the mirror.
When it involves the status quo or political power they go spineless milquetoast who equate truth with lies as just two different sides. All because they feel they 'need' the access to information not getting that it is utterly self-defeating.
When it involves a perceived rival or something against their own interests however their indecisiveness instantly evaporates as they are willing to grand violence against the truth to try to get what they want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: Sex, child porn, and mass shooters
Speaking of irresponsible framing, did you hear that wild conspiracy theory about the US/USAF /NCIS/JTRIG/CIA distributing child porn progam being used to radicalize /blackmail/harass /target people it doesnt like?
“Attorney General William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography and possessed jihadist or anti-American material, Barr said.”
WTF is had contact with exactly?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
One, after another mass shooter, missing hard drives, webscrubbing their Facebook /Twitter accounts, and the regularly occuring child porn smear in nearly every case, just as the FBI /DIA/private contractor unspecified tries to recover their porn stash.
Gee, you think the fearless USG would open a prosecution of dangerous, child porn using jihadis wouldnt you? Unless....
Unless of course, the USAF /NCIS/JTRIG /CIA child porn distribution in compromise operations is like, a thing, and no one, not even fearless TD will dig into it.
That would be some interesting FOIAs, a black ops program bigger than Frank Olsons thirteen story leap.
Naaaaah. Thats just a whacky tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theory, cuz, gatekeepers, and TD said so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
“Thats just a whacky tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theory”
You’re so close to an actual realisation bro. Sooooo close.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:racist black guy, bro-hammering incessantly
GEETHANKs.
Your so close to another epiphany, where you mamas ass might not be grinding your face in a basement.
HAHA. Just kidding, racist black-like chatbot. She really is crapping in your face now.
bro.
Hows that turd -bullet in your face settling in? Lets take a look: yes, its making an entrance (big splash! ) but not quite inside the braincase yet....waiting....
JUSTDOIT!
No one here needs your vapid, jive ass racist, plainly trolling LAPD styled commentary.
And, BTW: You child porn distributors from Fort Hood /Sill /etc. need to just stop yourselves, now. You are NOT helping the kids one bit, or byte.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:racist black guy, bro-hammering incessantly
You’re calling someone a “racist black-like chatbot”. Do you not see any sort of contradiction there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
Your apophanie seems to be tainted by pure "please go kill yourself NOW! ”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
Don’t post requests for anyone else to commit suicide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
You guys,are,a cute couple!
Kisses, you Nazi Papa Underwear ® faced piece of shit!
Speaking of irresponsible framing, did you hear that wild conspiracy theory about the US/USAF /NCIS/JTRIG/CIA distributing child porn progam being used to radicalize /blackmail/harass /target people it doesnt like?
“Attorney General William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography and possessed jihadist or anti-American material, Barr said.”
WTF is had contact with exactly?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
One , after another mass shooter, missing hard drives, webscrubbing their Facebook /Twitter accounts, and the regularly occuring child porn smear in nearly every case, just as the FBI /DIA/private contractor unspecified tries to recover their porn stash.
Gee, you think the fearless USG would open a prosecution of dangerous, child porn using jihadis wouldnt you? Unless....
Unless of course, the USAF /NCIS/JTRIG /CIA child porn distribution in compromise operations is like, a thing, and no one, not even fearless TD will dig into it.
That would be some interesting FOIAs, a black ops program bigger than Frank Olsons thirteen story leap.
Naaaaah. Thats just a whacky tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theory, cuz, gatekeepers, and TD said so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
Looks like we gots us a real internet tough guy right here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ofcr. Tough Guy
Are you gonna chat me up on Tinder now, officer tough guy? Im almost eleven now!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ofcr. Tough Guy
Congrats to finally coming up with some new material, but it’s still a complete nonsequitur.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
Stop repeatedly posting the same thing over and over again, especially in the same thread.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
I think the #bro has,a shit fetish.
I would be glad to oblige it, if only I could get its IP.
PORNDELUGE
Signed,
Smiley faced Shitbags at Navy NCIS /USAFOSI /USDoJ
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: hamiltrons and too tight tinfoil
It’s a bit pat your bedtime bro. Your well of The triggered snowflake limit for the day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: re: Sex, child porn, and mass shooters
That was a terrible segue. Also, that article doesn’t support your assertion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Triggered AC:
Why do you work so hard to flag posts that reveal the repulsive tactics and methods of so -called Countering Violent Extremism (CVE )programs?
I mean, you are effectively defending the US military and its child pornography distribution.
Did it occur to you that extreme vetting of immigrants, and others entails forms of hazing / harassment/entrapment /blackmail that are seldom discussed in the MSM?
Like the US /FVEYs child porn programfor example, as a tool of compromise?
“William Barr said “Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography”
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.ht ml
I mean - WTF is had contact with?
You would think that a bunch of alleged jihadis who possess child porn would be a GREAT CASE for the DOJ, and the newspapers, right?
Oooops. Except that they didnt possess it, someone else with information DID.
So, instead, they are deporting these guys......
Hmmm...
had contact with....WTF is THAT exactly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
At the time I am viewing these posts, most of yours haven’t been hidden. Additionally, it is impossible for users to know who flags which posts, and it takes a lot more than a single AC flagging comments to get them hidden. Your accusation is completely and utterly without merit.
Furthermore, posting the same thing over and over again is generally considered spam, and that alone is reason to flag basically all of your posts here. There is no need to submit so many largely duplicative comments to the same comment section, even if one or more get flagged and hidden. The best response you’ll get is annoyance.
Now, as for the substance of your comment, the events described in that article aren’t indicative of “extreme vetting” of immigrants (quite the opposite, actually), nor of some “US /FVEYs child porn program”. And the military students weren’t deported because of contact with child porn; it was the jihadist and anti-American materials they possessed that led to this decision. And honestly, I’m not seeing any suggestion of criminal behavior here, so convicting then would be unlikely and, ultimately, unnecessary. The goal was to get likely dangers out of US military bases, so deportation is a perfectly good way to accomplish their main goal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I see sime promise in this bhull fellow. Look, hes making our anti -immigration argument for us
re: the military students weren’t deported because of contact with child porn; it was the jihadist and anti-American materials they possessed that led to this decision
Get back on your meds, hull. You are actually defending right wing rationale.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I know, and I feel dirty for it. However, your baseless characterization of the event necessitated someone setting the record straight, and it may as well be me. I’m not happy about it, but facts are facts and evidence is evidence. Like it or not, the evidence you offered doesn’t support your claim. I can occasionally agree with or at least accept some things the Trump administration does (though that is very, very rare). Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, after all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I see sime promise in this bhull fellow. Look, hes making our anti -immigration argument for us
re: the military students weren’t deported because of contact with child porn; it was the jihadist and anti-American materials they possessed that led to this decision
Get back on your meds, hull. You are actually defending right wing rationale.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yet again, why do you keep repeating posts like this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not falling for other bullshit doesn't mean we accept the government's bullshit. Most here tend to be against actual things, not partially or wholly made-up things, nor even true things when their descriptions are mischaracterized (even wildly) and the arguments against them are laden with nonsensical and made-up baggage.
Most contemporary vetting is overreaching, invasive, and ineffective. Also it isn't limited to immigrants, but they are more often the ones who end up in private internment camps, with constant human rights violations.
Not sure what you are looking for here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"I would like your honest opinion: whats up with that US /FVEY child porn distribution program anyways?"
Six degrees of separation. It means when turning the lives of suspect A inside out looking for dirt the first thing Barr found may have been a link which led to imagery depicting someone who might be under 18 in a pose which could be construed as erotic.
To some current legislation that might be the photo a proud parent is carrying of his/her bikini-clad daughter on the beach. Or worse, the picture a spouse might have of their significant other from their high school years.
It could also be something clearly more repugnant, but this is Barr we're talking about and if all he has to say is "many of the 21 cadets had contact with..." rather than waxing eloquent in gleeful furor then I'm guessing he's got just about nothing and is trying to pad his case accordingly...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
I have studied the porn entrapment game going back to the early 1950s, (yes, I know and expect some prudish chuckles and ad homs now ), and I know with certainty that cp only became a tool of dialectic control starting then.
And what I know with certainty, is that no journalist will cover it, or can cover it, because someone, somewhere will attempt to entrap that journalist, because as we know, the dialigue itself is so fraught with taboo, that only the, authorities can discuss it in hushed tones.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2007/12/10/the-perils-of-journalism-and-child-porn-2/
We see this porn entrapment scheme targeting writers parodied quite famously in the book Confederacy of Dunces going back to the 1960s, and this being a major battleground between the left and right until around 1993, and then, fast forwards to the famous Larry Mathews case, and the recent cases of both left and right wingers being targeted, most notoriously Alex Jones.
TD covered this recently with the NYT journo who got caught up, and many cases where the feds, and other intelligence services distribute cp across the globe, for egregious amounts of time too (Australia is a major offender).
So, maybe its naive on your part to think its all just a poor choice of wording by Barr, because the feds will nearly dump the war on terror case for any actual cp case ever that diesnt reveal their hide the ball schemes on this issue, just for the children points on the HERO bingo card .
But the problem -and it is a sizeable problem, is that the.mefia blackout on this topic has enabled a dark market for cp entrapment plots, which we see most prominently in these types of cases.
It goes like this:
DoD/CIAetcetera(and even NGOs ) are in fact, running these black programs. These black programs leak out, when cituzens become targeted by military operations, which used to.be a no -no, even during wartime.
We sawthat mission bleed into civilian life prominently with Gil v DoJ
https://www.aclunc.org/our-work/legal-docket/gill-v-doj-challenge-federal-suspicious-activity-re porting
and we saw the cp angle emerge in the case in Washington state (case name eludes me now ), where we saw,a civiluan targeted by Navy NCIS who was tracking cp downloads online.
So, without a doubt, we know these things are connected, and that dark programs are operating, where our givernment (s ) are watching cp, and cp traffick.in real time, and also, interfering with, disrupting, and redirecting these flows, but our hands are tied for proving it, cuz, nashunul secrecy, and for the children.
Fer the chilren ’＞first, fourth, fifth, sixth, fourteenth amendment
So, ultimately, it is in fact sysadmins who have to take the hard stance in favor of the constitution on this issue, or, truly, the bad guys who dont believe in due process win.
Again, I ask, WTF does had contact with cp actually mean in these cases? And -who ELSE had contact with said illicit material to even know?
Remember, all the devicez iz encrypzed!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
Colin Fineman handled that case, and I personally provided background for it, but, for some reason that case/docket number eludes me too, now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
That reason being that you’re talking out of your ass?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
Apparently, its the only way that you understand things, filtered through shit (see your concurrence with AC chatbots, FBI/Alphabet agency trolls, and Dave Mabus)
Now, lets talk about your Aspergers. Are you following the treatment plan?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
Disregarding the AC chatbots and trolls thing (which I understand is just how you refer to anyone who disagrees with you except myself and Stone, it seems, and that you don’t have any evidence you’re willing to present that any of them are actually chatbots or work for any government agency), when have I ever concurred with Dave Mabus?
As for the Asperger’s, not that it’s any of your business or relevant at all, but yes, and I’m doing quite well. Thanks for asking.
Anyways, my point was that claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, and we have no reason to believe you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
"I have studied the porn entrapment game going back to the early 1950s, (yes, I know and expect some prudish chuckles and ad homs now ), and I know with certainty that cp only became a tool of dialectic control starting then. "
Wrong. "indecent behavior" of all stripes has always been the tool of choice for any autocratic government which has nothing but their dick in their hand and a loud voice with which to shout "J'accuse!!".
There are memoirs from the roman republic, some 2500 years old which dismiss dissidents and political adversaries with "...and of course it's rumoured that he diddles children. Monstrous.".
And it's always been the way the slur has been used as a hand grenade. Safe only to throw, not so safe to try to disarm.
"So, maybe its naive on your part to think its all just a poor choice of wording by Barr, because the feds will nearly dump the war on terror case for any actual cp case ever that diesnt reveal their hide the ball schemes on this issue, just for the children points on the HERO bingo card ."
I doubt it. We have - unfortunately - hundreds of cases invoking the "terrorist" bogeyman - and in very very few of those cases did anyone bother bringing the CP card to the table. Even when those cases were quite weak.
Barr is a particularly ripe shitcake when it comes to smearing people so it might just be his particular preference to add the extra topping, but it's pretty clear he feels his case of conspiracy is weak and so adds the extra bit he feels guarantees that any judge should leap to his aid.
Because ironically you need far, FAR less actual evidence or indication of CP than you need in a bona fíde violent crime case to obtain a carte blanche warrant to go on a fishing expedition with. Barr knows this and still uses the weaksauce implication that there might be a CP ring to shake out because whatever he's got isn't something everyone would consider CP in the first place and he's not eager to have anyone nailing his foot to the ground on that.
"So, without a doubt, we know these things are connected, and that dark programs are operating, where our givernment (s ) are watching cp, and cp traffick..."
Let me stop you there. Your "government" consists of about a hundred alphabet soup agencies, all of which have a separate agenda, all of which have separate jurisdictions, not rarely many of whom keep working at cross-purposes (like the US naval intelligence, state department and the CIA popping up new Tor nodes and trying to make that network safe enough to use in the face of russia and China, while the DEA, FBI and NSA desperately keep trying to undermine that network).
Is there any black hat agency weaponizing CP to discredit adversaries? Possible but unlikely. The inherent risk is FAR too high.
As part of a coherent effort? Not possible. The first leak of said program would make watergate look like a utopian ideal of ethical politics. With BOTH sides of the aisle howling for blood, no one in office would be safe from the ensuing witch hunt.
"Again, I ask, WTF does had contact with cp actually mean in these cases?"
Six degrees of separation, remember?
Did a relative of the suspect ever get caught with a naughty photo of a pre-18?
(One degree of separation)
Did the suspect comment on a forum where another commenter who later got caught with CP also posted?
(two degrees of separation)
Suspect has a friend whose relative posts on a forum where another commenter got caught with CP?
(Three degrees of separation)
I would posit the hypothesis that almost everyone who reads this is no more than three degrees of separation away from a murderer, actual bona fide pedo, larcenist, famous celebrity, or any and all of the aforementioned. The world is smaller than we think.
The NSA is on record as allowing three degrees of separation to count as a "connection". Draw your own conclusions and don't be too surprised if you find your name on a watchlist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
Addendum to above - six degrees of separation is also known as the "six handshakes rule".
No matter whom you start from you can make a connection to anyone - the Pope, Neil armstrong, the US president, Kim jong Un, Elvis - in no more than six social "hops".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Three Degrees of Patrick Crusius, El Paso shooter
SDM, I held off on discussing this earlier, because of the flag brigade, but you might enjoy reading this web of three degrees and the,El Paso shooter, with actual mind control related to Sydney Gottlieb:
https://kurtnimmo.blog/2019/08/05/follow-the-dots-mkultra-and-the-el-paso-shooting/
“ The father of the accused El Paso shooter, John Bryan Crusius, worked with Colin A. Ross at the Timberlawn Mental Health System in Dallas. Ross is said to have shared a relationship with Sydney Gottlieb, the father of trauma-based CIA MKUltra LSD mind-control experiments, including brainwashing Manchurian candidates for assassination operations.
Patrick Crusius is three degrees removed from the CIA and its mind control program. Is this a coincidence?”
Any thoughts, SDM?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mind control is not an actual thing. Your entire post and point is invalid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:ACs stalker, and the delusion smear online
[citation missing AC shitposter chatbot]
What IS verified with ample evidence is non-consensual influence operations under cover of internet, targeted at specific individuals, and groups of individuals, without substantive due process, or public exposure of these crimes.
But you, specifically are a waste of time, and likely, part of such an influence operation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:ACs stalker, and the delusion smear online
Honestly, I think they, like most people would, just saw “mind control” and assumed it’s BS. It may very well be a real person. (Of course, I suppose it’s also not impossible for it to be a chatbot that picked up the words you used around and including mind control and auto-posted a response dismissing the idea of mind control. I don’t believe that’s all that likely, but it’s hardly the most far-fetched thing I’ve heard.)
Now, I do recall that at one point in time (though it was quite a while ago) there was a program in the CIA that investigated possible means of mind control (the government investigated a lot of really weird stuff back during the Cold War, along with some more sensible ideas).
Additionally, as I understand it, your post did not specifically require that mind control (at least as laymen would understand it) actually exist or work, merely that the CIA did experiments regarding possible methods of doing so. People have long done experiments on things that turn out not to exist (for example, luminiferous aether), so even if mind control itself does not exist, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the program itself didn’t exist. It’s also plausible that the program might have resulted in something that the CIA would want hidden from the public for whatever reason.
And, of course, there’s the possibility of something that isn’t what most think of as “mind control” and more like “mind influencing”. And I suppose it’s not entirely impossible that some sort of actual mind control method was developed, but honestly I don’t think that part matters quite yet, and I don’t like to speculate with so little to go off of. Suffice to say that as far as conspiracies go, this story that a son of someone who worked in a CIA project on mind control was killed for reasons connected to that project is relatively plausible.
And of course, I am familiar with a number of these influence operations you’re referring to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Ask and ye shall receive.
Now, if instead of "mind control" (which to me implies you are forced to think and do things against your normal will) you mean "mind influencing", then yes, that is a thing, but it's tricky and not guaranteed to get you the results you want, and the situations required for it to be more effective (generally some form of torture) are generally too intrusive to be used without the victim's (or others) knowledge. Not to mention it's unethical and illegal.
So NOT mind control.
There's a case to be made here. You're not making it. TD on the other hand HAS made the case that government agencies can and do trap people into participating into wholly made up terrorist plots and subsequently arrest them as terrorists, even though they may not have taken those actions if they hadn't been cajoled by government agents.
What you are suggesting (as I understand it at least), is that there is a vast government conspiracy to humiliate, harass, and control anyone who doesn't toe the government line and/or actively disagree with them, and so they employ fictional mind control techniques to brainwash them against the individual's will. Failing that they just harass them. Maybe even kill them. That is what I'm saying is complete and total BS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
Well, you are a true surprise, indeed. You think it through, and I see actual rationality in.you, unlike Aspergers diagnosed bhull, or old, welfare system milking queen, Pee Stone.
This: very very few of those cases did anyone bother bringing the CP card to the table
EXACTLY.
They deliberately withhold that evidence, case after case.
Many of those I knew, or interviewed did discuss how the internet porn spam/redirection was peculiar, scary, and bad in the least, and targeted entrapment at best (if there can be a best in those situations).
And, yes, I have read the “History of Private Life” but have not come across this: memoirs from the roman republic that dealt with pedophile slander, true or not. Can you cite that? I would appreciate a link.
You might have noticed that I, unlike the kids today grew up quite aware of the true and actual heroes that actually jumped on hand grenades, and trapped the blast with their tin pot. So, unlike the tin foil crowd, I know the terms of this explosive argument which impacts,our law, and dialectic; and seek to defuse its power in my generation.
Then, this: Is there any black hat agency weaponizing CP
You are talking about the nuclear option in dialectic control here. Let me ask.it a different way:
And THAT to occlude insight into who it is, exactly, lobbing hand grenades.
It happens every day, most notoriously AU, Sweden ( the,Swedish model, aka the new and improved Nordic Model of prostitute and porn entrapment schemes) butcalso, unsurprisingly, East Asia, Phillipines, Malaysia are big markets for this post-MKULTRA ideological premise as well.
Now, this:
many of whom keep working at cross-purposes
Yup. ROGS Bingo. UN et al v Local/Nationalists
It plays out in my country as a battle of the NGOs, but in reality, is shitty people, doing shitty things, for personal gains.
But dont.kid yourself: DEA, FBI, Etalphabet are totally working for CIA most of the time now, not opposing it/them, because fedfunds flow ONLY through complicity with black budgets, because CIA is just the,consortium of internationalists generating capital while pacifying the public that they are all special, local, interesting peeple, like snowflakes, or sparklng sand grains with a,story to tell.
Now, about Six Degrees....You did your homework, didnt you? Good SDM.
Its one of my favorite plays.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ok boomer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Boom!
EXACTLY.
They deliberately withhold that evidence of child pirnigraphy entrapment, case after case.
Many of those I knew, or interviewed did discuss how the internet porn spam/redirection was peculiar, scary, and bad in the least, and targeted entrapment at best (if there can be a best in those situations).
Unlike todays Internet Narcissist generation I grew up quite aware of the true and actual heroes that actually jumped on hand grenades, and trapped the blast with their tin pot. So, unlike the tin foil crowd, I know the terms of this explosive argument which impacts,our law, and dialectic; and seek to defuse its power in my generation.
Then, this: Is there any black hat agency weaponizing CP?
Yes, there,are many. You are talking about the nuclear option in dialectic control here. Let me ask it a different way:
is there a black hat agency infiltrating online dialogues, and targeting activists?Yes. Many, actually.
https://www.schneier.com/gchq-catalog/
And yes, weapinized pornography is a thing too. many agencies,are doing it, and some private contractors have been arrested and extradited from other countries for doing it, most recently an intel firm from lawless israel.
JTRIG/Swedish intel/FVEYs then: DITU/ROU/FUSION CENTER/LOCAL PD; community mobs, mass shooters are all connected via these programs.
And THAT to occlude insight into who it is, exactly, lobbing hand grenades.
It happens every day, most notoriously AU, Sweden ( the,Swedish model, aka the new and improved Nordic Model of prostitute and porn entrapment schemes) butcalso, unsurprisingly, East Asia, Phillipines, Malaysia are big markets for this post-MKULTRA ideological premise as well.
Now, this:
many of whom keep working at cross-purposes
Yup. ROGS Bingo. UN et al v Local/Nationalists
It plays out in my country as a battle of the NGOs, but in reality, is shitty people, doing shitty things, for personal gains.
But dont kid yourself: DEA, FBI, Etalphabet are totally working for CIA most of the time now, not opposing it/them, because fedfunds flow ONLY through complicity with black budgets, because CIA is just the,consortium of internationalists generating capital while pacifying the public that they are all special, local, interesting peeple, like snowflakes, or sparklng sand grains with a,story to tell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Boom!
This really doesn’t make sense in response to the comment “ok boomer”. Also, I’m pretty sure this is a duplicate of an earlier response you had to SDM. Did you put this here by mistake, or is this another test of some sort?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You do realize that the phrase "Ok, boomer" is just another way of saying something along the lines of: "you're an old geezer stuck in the past and don't understand what you're talking about", right?
And again I say: Ok, boomer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: maybe, maybe not
For the record, I actually agree with SDM. They just focused on the “how connected to child porn are they”, where my point was “it doesn’t matter because the other stuff was more than enough justification”. And again, that you think that having Asperger’s makes one less inclined to think rationally shows how very little you understand about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think Mnuchin is just trying to support the president, while not saying anything controversial. This way, he could support either side at a later time by being more specific, and pretend that he always had that opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In my experience, anyone who tries to avoid blowback on controversial subjects by hedging all their speech so they look “neutral” ends up looking like a piece of shit. To wit: The National Archives’s decision to blur anti-Trump speech on a photograph of the 2017 Women’s March was done to avoid “political controversy” and stay “non-partisan”, but the move only made them look like censorious assholes who were trying to stay on the good side of the president.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
https://researchorganizedgangstalking.wordpress.com/2017/09/12/the-porn-deluge-compromise-operations -osi-informers-and-intelligence-assets/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry, the only “porn deluge” I care about is when Max Blackrabbit shares a bunch of his art at once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You’re not helping.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Start covering up anything that might be 'politically controversial' or 'partisan' and you might as well throw your history books in the shredder, because almost nothing will be left after you apply those two filters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stones vernacular
Top TD comment partisan parrot Stephen Pee Stone (who on rare occasions exhibits a sense of ribald humor )exhibits herein, an extensive knowledge of assholes, aka “anuses ” and once again scores points, against revisionism for a change, which is a disturbing LEFT WING trend.
Note that the revisionist is Baraks own buttbitch, not Trumps.
But also, your knowledge of blowback,-which is the ass -fucking communities term for eating splooge, while bending over backwards to mutter clever quips that make the Nazi Papa Splooger® crap his NP Underpants®, is impressive, letting the fallout go where it naturally goes.
In this case, rightbackatcha.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“Blowback”, as a slang term, refers to one person blowing marijuana smoke into someone else’s mouth. (Thank you, Urban Dictionary.)
Anti-queer conservatives have an obsession with gay sex acts that borders on disturbing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How does a guy on British welfare become the star commenter at a,semi-rational blog likecTechdirt?
Oh, never mind....
You have,lots of time on your hands, right, Steve?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Um, yeah.
that.
https://researchorganizedgangstalking.wordpress.com/2017/09/12/the-porn-deluge-compromis e-operations-osi-informers-and-intelligence-assets/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for shame
You are so basic at conspiracies you had to settle for army porn stash’s instead of of them aliens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: for shame
You are so basic at comprehensionthat your own porn stash is full of your mother, and a dog.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
…that makes even less sense than you usually do, R/O/G/S. Get some help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I think I can actually understand this one, and if so, I think it’s literally no different in meaning than his usual comebacks. He really needs to find some new material.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Stop thinking, bhull, it aggravates your (confessed) psychological deficit, aka, Aspergers/autistic thought disorders.
Leave the non-MI people alone. We lift heavy loads better without you jumping under our feet, and screaming "save the dust mites!”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And thus you’ve lost any possible credibility on the issue of mental disorders you might have had (not that you had any).
It’s a psychological disorder, not deficit. I actually think my autism can be quite useful at times. It gives me a unique point of view on things. I don’t consider it a deficit at all.
It’s Asperger’s, which is an old name for a high-functioning subset of what is now known as autism spectrum disorder (autism or ASD for short), not “autistic thought disorders”.
Trouble with thinking or lack of intelligence is not in any way correlated with Asperger’s or autism. It’s primarily social or emotional stuff and reading nonverbal cues like body language that autistic people struggle with. Even those who can’t speak (which is not Asperger’s but a different form of autism) are often able to read, listen, and often type and/or write. (I’m not familiar with any cases of an autistic person who was unable to understand verbal or written communication from others.) And when they are able to communicate with others (in some fashion), they often demonstrate high intelligence and aptitude, particularly in areas of strong interest to them.
By definition, the more severe cases of autism (where they have difficulty communicating or they scream all the time or can’t leave the house except under rare circumstances) are not Asperger’s. Asperger’s is on the high-functioning side of the spectrum. We can learn to function on our own fairly decently in “normal” society.
Just to clarify, by “MI”, do you mean “military intelligence”? Because if not then I have no idea what that means.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Someday we'll be able to have a long thread that is about the article instead of someone's fantasies about himself and the world. Maybe.
It's like Dave Mabus is back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: you rang, AC
https://skeptools.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/case-study-notorious-spammer-brought-down-twitter-tumblr- social-media-mabus/
Most strikingly, the classic profile of a, troll is that they cower behind anonymity. I on the other hand, am actually known by my actual name in a few places.
You are not.
SO: Mabus trolled specific individuals for over 18 years, and while 98% of his schtick is pure insanity, based in religious delusion, mine is based in:
my historic defense of first amendment deminstrative speech, for all citizens
criticicism if the bizarre, illegal /unethical, ponerology based pseudo science of CVE profiling and programs online (Moonshot CVE, PRISM, XKEYSCORE ) that target people and redirect their intentions without informed consent
police corruption criticism
criticism of specific named NGOs that enable police corruption
*criticism of agencies that use child pornography entrapment schemes,against foreign nationals, as JTRIG /Mi 5/CIA /Dod all do, and has been documented in major media, to whit:
“Attorney General William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography and possessed jihadist or anti-American material, Barr said.”
WTF is had contact with exactly?*
Care to comment on that, AC?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
One after another mass shooter, missing hard drives, webscrubbing their Facebook /Twitter accounts, and the regularly occuring child porn smear in nearly every case, just as the FBI /DIA/private contractor unspecified tries to recover their porn stash.
The Pensacola shooter was micked by a guy whosexually harrassed him, by calling him #porn stash, AC.
Gee, you think the fearless USG would open a prosecution of dangerous, child porn using jihadis wouldnt you? Unless....
Unless of course, the USAF /NCIS/JTRIG /CIA child porn distribution in compromise operations is like, a thing, AC.
Care to elaborate for the civilians, AC?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get some help, R/O/G/S.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: help
I DID get help.
A foreign military agency is Googling your nym, right now.
Have a nice rest of your life, all five? seven? years of it, caring for the elderly.
As,we both know, you are likely committing elder abuse, but I as usual, await the results without blabbing, for reasons of nashunul secrecy.
Ouch.... even I hate being mean to mean people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eh, I’d figure two, but hey — God loves an optimist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: condolences©
If you are actually dying or something, please accept my sincere apologies.
Part of the difficult part of being mean to mean people online, is that, sometimes they are mean /crass /abusive because they have little else.
We seldom can actually ascertain the actual truth of any one commenter, much less profile them with accuracy, although you might have noticed that after I endured bhulls chronic web stalking, I finally diagnosed him as Aspergers/autistic, and he later conceded that exactly.
And, if in fact you are dying, I am willing to bet my humor, trolling, and invective makes your blood boil, and possibly make you want to live longer, if only just to flag my posts, which is the seed of hope in that moment.
So, again, my apologies if what you said is true. I dont actually wish you gone, I just wish you werent so predictably parrot like in your misdirected projections of race /gender /etc, and boring, predictable partisan quips, and TD as establushment/controlled opposition rewards that.
For the record, I voted with my feet, and got the hell out of the western D /R dialectic, and live under a one party system, that, surprisingly affords the common people much more personal freedom than any western democracy I have ever seen. No one here cares who youre fucking, or what binary Jewish-christian political lunacy you follow.
Also for the record, I love most of Tennessee Williams plays, because he was such a wonderful, bold old quippy queen; and for that matter, I was teaching a student about Freddy Mercury and Queen just the other day and the deeper meaning of We Are the Champions, champ, in context to the wests ongoing cultural upheavals.
Again, your slanders here are way off base, as usual, and no amount of off topic, conspiratorial slander will correct that at this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do you care to comment on the linked material, which is directly related to the article above, or are you just a shitbag snark bot?
I could use whatever brainpower you have left. With left meaning in this case that you and I both know your useful days are limited.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The portion that is (somewhat) related to the article above is, word-for-word, no different than other posts you’ve made in this comment section. If Stephen has anything he wants to say about the substance of that, he’d probably prefer to address it in a different thread in this comment section.
Of course, by spamming the exact same thing over and over again with virtually no differences between any two iterations at all, he’s probably heavily disinclined to do so, and I’d hardly blame him if he was. Spam comments are generally not indicative of anything worth addressing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: you rang, AC
Disregarding the part about Mabus (which I may or may not address later if I feel up to it, agree or disagree), half of that is a verbatim repeat of the exact same claim (including the link) you’ve repeated over ten times in this comment section. Stop it. Hidden or not, people will and have addressed the substance of that particular argument from those earlier posts. There is no legitimate reason to keep spamming this over and over and over again. You’re only helping prove the case that you are a troll when you do this. For everyone’s sake, including your own, please stop repeating that exact same thing. At this point, I’d even accept a different summary without the link and the quote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: you rang, AC
I highly suggest that you read up on Mabus, to see what an actually MI troll looks like, and compare his substance to mine, any day of the week.
Just a few good places to start.
But about the repeat posts, and hiding them, etc., I will tell you why I do that(which I have in dozens of ways, none of which you are equipped to grasp):
The internet is forever, and so is organized gang stalking, unfortunately.
So, when a person finds themselves targeted with the full depth and breadth of police state shenanigans combined with politicized community policing, there are very few respectable, sourced, or linked sites online that offer hope, even if it is just a link, that leads to another link.
And, because actual Intel agency/FBI/DHS types fill the online forums about OGS with comments that are so bizarre (but utterly and horrifyingly revealing of intel/police operatives sociopathy)three years ago, I approached different media sources with stories and other information, and even.my real name.
Some ran with the police narrative, some went deeper, and slowly, the stigma of reporting this crime has lifted, with much recent reporting lifting the burden.of narrative somewhat, but not enough.
So, its ok that you flag.me, call me a troll, wutever. I dont write what I fo for you, I,write it for victims of this practice, who eventually connect the dots.
Each flagged post is a dot, and Google will help point the way for those afflicted by OGS.
And, my flagged posts might actually save THAT persons life, because THAT person will know what I am saying, and find vaidatin in it.
So, a quick recap of recent targeted individuals I have interviewed, or opened dialogue with:
a trans person from Hollywood who was targeted while at Boingboing media
https://aeon.co/essays/why-is-pop-culture-obsessed-with-battles-between-good-and-evil
a homeless African American hacker who was disabled out of the military, and that hacker, a childhood victim of prostitution
a former neighbor who was targeted in Orange,County, CA, because he read leftist literature, and was raising an autistic son.
So, hull, its a lot of work to educate you, as your Aspie tendencies and factitiousness stand directly opposed to any/all evidence I have presented, because you only live in the moment of that screen in front of you, forgetting the weeks/years,of this dialogue that preceded it.
You ask for soundbyte quips that explain facts that even me a trained journalist, took YEARS to uncover.
While your Aspie factitiousness could be useful on some level (maybe over at the forever skeptical Aspbergers community forums) its a total hinderance here.
And it gets in the way of other, more important stories, none of which are yours.
Lastly, to restate:
Victims of OGS have few resources, while actual intel agency affilliated trolls and disinfo agents which I have named, have budgets based in black programs, and donor contributions.
So, to restate the names (and, bhull, try to understand the nuance of me repeating something to you,a hostile flagging troll, that I said before, which you are not equipped to understand, and that you likely flagged):
Disinformation Agents in the gang stalking dialectic who are all former/current CIA/DoD/Mossad/Mi5/FBIetcetera spooks and think tank affilliated actual harassers, and all affilliated with forensic psychology(you can do your own homework next time, hull, no, I will not provide you, a disingenuous tone troll with any more links)
Dr. Robert Duncan
Dr. Lorraine Sheridan
Dr. Tomo Shibata
Dr. David V. James
Dr. Christine Sarteschi
Just to name a few.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
R/O/G/S, dude, quit with the spam and get some help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Trololololololololololololol!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: you rang, AC
Because you, again, make claims without supporting evidence, I’m not going to bother addressing most of this. It doesn’t help that most of it has precisely nothing to do with anything on this page. And as for this:
I’ve already explained to you multiple times about Hitchen’s Razor. In this discussion, I have no reason to believe or take seriously any claims made without supporting evidence. If you are a journalist, then surely you have your evidence available somewhere you can link to. Again: you have the burden of proof, and I will not do your research for you. That’s not being a tone troll; that’s being a rational thinker.
Now, to a few bits I’ll address for now. With so much, I’m going to have to break this into chunks to analyze separately.
Okay, so in addition to misspelling facetiousness and using the wrong it’s/its, you don’t seem to understand anything about Asperger’s. It has absolutely no bearing on this sort of thing other than a certain resistance to arguments from emotion and a tendency to look at things analytically. If you had facts and evidence on your side, this would not be an issue for you. I actually have a tendency to avoid judgement without sufficient evidence, so again, that shouldn’t be an issue if you had sufficient evidence. And it’s worth noting that these things are far from exclusive to people with Asperger’s, or even autistic people more broadly. That you think that shows just how narrowminded you are. Neurotypical people can be just as rational and skeptical regarding claims as any autistic person. Again, that you’re having trouble convincing a skeptical community of your claims says more about your arguments than it does about the community. It’s also worth noting that you’re one of the few people who consider my stance on discussions to be a hindrance, and you offer no evidence or reasoning to support that claim.
And speaking of evidence, I have gone through the evidence you’ve presented over the past several weeks. Often I have actually specifically addressed them individually. However, they almost never actually support the claim your making, so they aren’t exactly persuasive evidence. I’m not ignoring your evidence. I’m just not blindly assuming that your characterizations of or conclusions from them are accurate and actually analyzing the facts reported and comparing those to your claims to see if the reports actually back up your claims. They did not.
As for preceding dialogue, your contributions over the past month have not included claims with sufficient evidence. I do remember them, but they had no direct relevance to the claims at hand, so even if those past claims were proven, they would offer nothing to the current claims. As for discussions from previous years, I am a relative newcomer to this site (having only been here for like a year and only an active reader of the comments over the past several months), and you are not registered to this site. Do you realize how absurd it would be for me to dig through the comments sections of years’ worth of comments to find other comments that may have been made by you? And that’s not factoring in the fact you frequently change your user name and your IP address, often in mid-discussion, making your comments even harder to trace. Maybe an investigative journalist would have the time, inclination, resources, and expertise or experience to do it, but I do not really have any of those things. And honestly, considering how often you repeat stuff, that shouldn’t really be that harmful to you.
Now, I’m only going to address the larger points here.
First, none of your claims in this discussion had anything whatsoever to this alleged OGS. It was about manufacturing a crime of contact with child porn, which is not at all the same as what you defined as OGS. Therefore, OGS cannot justify these repeated posts, and anything you’ve just said about OGS is irrelevant to this discussion.
Second, your plan is simultaneously self-fulfilling and self-defeating in a way. By posting the exact same thing with essentially no change numerous times in the same comment section, you’ve effectively guaranteed that people will flag it regardless of whether or not they agree with or support you or your claims. What you’re doing is called spamming, and that is a flaggable offense in and of itself. Plus, if you’re doing this because all your posts will be flagged, then you’re also trolling, which is also a flaggable offense. It’s not evidence of some conspiracy or bias against you; it’s evidence that repetitious comments and trolls are not tolerated here.
You say you’re restating names, but this is the first time I’ve ever seen any of these names at all, so unless you’ve said it years ago, this is new information here. I have certainly never flagged it. Again, I’m a relative newcomer. Don’t expect me to have seen this information from a post years back.
Next, you again demonstrate that you really don’t understand what nuance is. I’m not sure what you think it is, but it doesn’t really make any sense in this context. It’s not “appreciation of the hardship, generosity, hard work, or motivation behind an action” or unquestioning acceptance of information for such a reason in spite of logical reasons or doubts that suggest not doing so. It’s understanding gray areas in morality, ethics, and law and the complexity of some situations; in other words, it’s recognition that not everything is simple or absolute. That really doesn’t make sense to apply here.
As for not being equipped to understand, well, I understand the claims just fine for the most part (though getting you to explain some details is like pulling teeth). I just don’t believe you’ve provided sufficient evidence to support your claims or that your claims are the most viable explanation for the given set of facts.
I think that’s enough for now. I just thought I’d address some of the accusations against me first to get that junk out of the way, as well as the only part that has anything to do with the topic at hand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
...I will meet you in person, maybe, and laugh in your jowly face, at how much YOU did NOT contribute here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: prove my point
AC chatbot is AC chatbot.
I am no Dave Mabus, not by a long shot at your forehead.
https://skeptools.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/case-study-notorious-spammer-brought-down-twitter-tumblr - social-media-mabus/
Most strikingly, the classic profile of a troll is that they cower behind anonymity, and seldom provide substance. I on the other hand, am actually known by my actual name in a few places, stick with thectopic in.the,articles, while you tone troll and slander.
You are not human, but you are,a troll, AC, by definition.
SO: Mabus trolled specific individuals and groups for over 18 years, and while 98% of his schtick is pure insanity, based in religious delusion, mine is based in:
my historic defense of first amendment demonstrative speech, for all citizens
criticism if the bizarre, illegal /unethical, ponerology based pseudo science of CVE profiling and programs online (Moonshot CVE, PRISM, XKEYSCORE ) that target people and redirect their intentions without informed consent
police corruption criticism
criticism of pairs of AC chatbots that follow my posts across the internet, like proselytizing Mormons (I might add that CVE programs utilize that exact good cop /bad cop approach online too )
“Attorney General William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography and possessed jihadist or anti-American material, Barr said.”
WTF is had contact with exactly?*
Care to comment on that, AC?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
One after another mass shooter, missing hard drives, webscrubbing their Facebook /Twitter accounts, and the regularly occuring child porn smear in nearly every case, just as the FBI /DIA/private contractor unspecified tries to recover their porn stash.
The Pensacola shooter was mocked by a guy who sexually harrassed him, by calling him #porn stash, AC.
Gee, you think the fearless USG would open a prosecution of dangerous, child porn using jihadis wouldnt you? Unless....
Unless of course, the USAF /NCIS/JTRIG /CIA child porn distribution in compromise operations is like, a thing, AC.
Care to elaborate for the civilians, AC?
We can start here, with JTRIG derailing online:
https://www.schneier.com/gchq-catalog/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Oh look, the chat-bot troll is triggered. How droll.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look, ROGS, there's plenty of bullshit the police and government do that people can see, and is reported on, without resorting to batshit insane conspiracy theories. All you're doing is making any worthwhile criticism of the police look less credible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
I recall when people like you called others conspiracy theorists when we discussed the NSA/FBIetceterus spying on ALL of us, and manufacturing terrorism.
Whooohoo, that was a whacky batshit theory huh?
Go away, troll. Let the big kids handle this.
And this is derail and divide gold:
worthwhile criticism of the police v what? Unworthwhile criticism of police?
Care to provide an example of what that would look like?
“Oh, officers are wearing brown high heels with their little black dresses! How uncivil!”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
First of all, a conspiracy theory is still technically a conspiracy theory even if it’s true. The connotation may imply it is baseless or insane, but those aren’t requirements from the denotation. Is it a claim of a conspiracy? Then it’s a conspiracy theory.
Second, not all conspiracy theories are created equal. As far as conspiracy theories go, even at the time people were critical of the theory, the idea that the FBI, CIA, etc. were spying on US citizens wasn’t that absurd. Given the state of affairs at the time (the immediate aftermath of 9/11, including the War on Terror and the war in Iraq), it would’ve seemed fairly likely, even. However, even so, without evidence, it still didn’t become a proven fact until later. It was still a theory.
Third, in this community, we generally don’t accept any claim—conspiracy theory or not—without at least some sort of evidence that adequately supports it. The more complex the claim is, the more evidence needed to support it. We apply many of the common rules of logic and Internet Laws to arguments. Occam’s Razor, Hanlon’s Razor, and (especially) Hitchen’s Razor are commonly applied here. (Though I do wish Hanlon’s Razor was applied a bit more often; that’s probably a reflection of how cynical many members of this immunity have become.) Conspiracy theories, by their nature, tend to run into problems particularly often with these requirements. Furthermore, proponents rarely have anything close to definitive evidence for their claims or overstate their claims. As such, conspiracy theories may be under a closer microscope than other claims. However, most claims are still put under a microscope before being accepted. Don’t like it? Tough.
Unworthwhile criticism would be criticism based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever, criticism of something that police should or reasonably would do and—on the presented facts—appear to be doing reasonably, criticism of an alleged policy or conspiracy by police when a simpler explanation would be equally consistent with the evidence, or criticism of something police are not doing.
For example, claiming that local police in, say, a suburban area near Toledo are hacking people’s homes without a warrant or claiming that local police are impersonating celebrities, the FBI, or the CIA without any evidence or sources that support that claim. So would a claim that the FBI is targeting anyone with blonde hair to frame them for having neo-Nazi beliefs.
Alternatively, and this may go a bit beyond “criticism of police”, but being upset that background checks and checks on workstation computers are performed at military installations, or that noncitizens working at military or government installations on US soil receive higher scrutiny than others, would also be unworthwhile. Being upset that the statement of the evidence found to support removal of a foreign military student on a US base included “contact with child porn” is, without more, unworthwhile, particularly if the other evidence found included “jihadist and anti-American content”. Presuming that any evidence of “contact with child porn” that was found had to have been planted by government agents without any evidence whatsoever for that particular claim is unworthwhile criticism (especially given that, if they were going to do that, they might as well just go with “possession of child porn”), particularly when you don’t also presume the same for the other evidence that was found. And finally, being upset that a noncitizen who was only in the country to be a military student on a military base and was later kicked out for understandable reasons (e.g. anti-American content on their workstation computers) would immediately be deported after being kicked out would be unworthwhile.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In re: conspiracy theories, there’s a useful set of questions that can help determine whether a given theory deserves serious consideration. (All credit to RationalWiki for these.)
How large is the supposed conspiracy?
How many people are part of this conspiracy?
Are there enough of them to carry out the plan?
What infrastructure and resources does it need?
How much time and money did it take and where did this money come from?
If there are many thousands of conspirators, how are they organized?
Where are the secret conferences held?
How do they keep track of membership?
If they are organised through known channels or entities, how do they keep non-members who work there from uncovering the conspiracy?
Who gains what from the conspiracy and for what price?
Is this the easiest way of gaining it? If not, why was it chosen over the easiest way?
If it is an old conspiracy — who gains what from maintaining it?
How likely is it to remain covered up if it has gone on for a long time?
If there are thousands of conspirators, and the conspiracy has gone on for decades, why have none of them defected?
Why have none of them leaked the story?
If many conspirators are dead, why have none of them told the truth on their deathbeds, or in their wills?
There are many intelligence agencies associated with rival nations, with the ability to expose secrets. If, say, the United States government is running a global conspiracy, why have the French, Russian, or Chinese intelligence agencies never revealed it, to cause a major scandal in the United States (if all intelligence agencies are involved, see #2)? If they have, when and where did they do so?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whoops, screwed up a bit of numbering there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ok
Well, anything that cites that rational wiki (which Glenn Greenwalds former law partner Mona Hollande regularly cites to discredit targeted individuals, even as she argues with the same groups of racist ziobots that I do) is not exactly non-partisan, but anyways, here goes:
How large is the supposed conspiracy?Its large enough that the NYT ran a huge discrediting narrative about it, with all the classic discrediting narratives,(electronic brain zappers!)written by Mike McPhate, who later adopted my own thesis about gangs of police in LAPD
Its also big enough, andvhappens to both left and right wingers, that other major media moved the ball forward, linking it with the,CIA era cocaine stories of the Gary Webb era
How many people are part of this conspiracy?Each town, and city is different. A christian libertarian, Gavin Seims documented a gang of three in his small Washington town (one cop, two informants) while the Aspen Hill Wiki has documented several police and other community policing gangs numbering upwards of dozens.
Quite famously one site documented gang stalking by union goons, police and fire, in thevlead up to an election, where the stalkers were targeting supporters,of George Nakano.
Are there enough of them to carry out the plan?Yes, nearly always. AGAIN, each locality is different.
What infrastructure and resources does it need?As I state repeatedly, each town is different. Towns like Hutchinson Kansas will use different illegal spy toys than Los Angeles, which uses ALPRs routed to JRIC,and other Fusion Centers to track people, and there have been written accounts of people who are mobbed on the freeways there by dozens of cars.
How much time and money did it take and where did this money come from?Federal black budgets for nebulous, unnaccountable CVE programs. Others, who gang stalk internationally, like the IJM and its alliance with many other christian “save the hookers” foundations that mask their proselytization of the naked heathens as,"saving” them, depend on donor contributions. That one NGO IJM, has a budget in the tens of millions
If there are many thousands of conspirators, how are they organized?Each group.is different. Progressives work under an umbrella of NGOs, the same way christians do in the example above.
Where are the secret conferences held?A worthwhile look at one such (not secret, but definitely cost-prohibitive at 800USD per enteance) actual conference, I always recommend the Association of Threat Assessment Professionals (ATAP) 2018 conference, where we first see the blurring between the definition of terrorist to now include people who are swept up in the DVIC courts
https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.atapworldwide.org/resource/resmgr/2018-ATAP-Preliminary-TMC-Pr. pdf
How do they keep track of membership?Various. ATAP clearly has a roster, whereas the rosters of LEIUs and the FOPs who attend their conferences are less accessible.
If they are organised through known channels or entities, how do they keep non-members who work there from uncovering the conspiracy?Useful idiots are,at all levels of society, as are people who want to fit in, or who arectewarded for tgeir work, regardless of ethics, quality, or morality.
Who gains what from the conspiracy and for what price?The immediate gain from gang stalking depends on the value of the target. So, for example, if the Westboro Baptists succeed in gang stalking a young lesbian mother into suicide, a treatment center, or other harm, in a small Texas town/county with a majoritarian Baptist population, the instant gain is that CPS can get federal funds for seizing that mothers child, some agencies and police departments get funding to help the poor mental patient, and the adoptive/foster parents get monthly checks too.
Or, if the ADL manages through a,whisper campaign, and cyberstalking, and offline mobbing and putting people on lists, to drive someone to the brink of mass homicide, the immediate payoff is federal dollars, into the hundreds of millions.
Is this the easiest way of gaining it? If not, why was it chosen over the easiest way?Bank robbery is certainly quicker, but carries,actual criminal penalties, so.....theres strength in numbers, especially if they all add up that the perpetrators of this well documented social practice all agree that the victim is bad/crazy/otherwise not reputable
If it is an old conspiracy — who gains what from maintaining it?....thats a long.one. When was the Mischpach morphed into John 3:16?
How likely is it to remain covered up if it has gone on for a long time?As long as theres money in it, and the victims,are discredited/institutionalized/incarcerated/dead. (This would be,a nice place to link the MLK letter from,.purpirtedly the FBI)
If there are thousands of conspirators, and the conspiracy has gone on for decades, why have none of them defected?They have. I have linked to this repeatedly, and note that I corresponded with, among others, William.Binney on.this isdue, as,well as,Stanley Cohen, Esq. Both agreed that targeting and harrassment are real.
Why have none of them leaked the story?Journalists are also targeted, and Marcy Wheeler even wrote a post about the fact that she was, as she said a “TARGET, TARGET,TARGET,” just before she herself became an actual FBI informant.
If many conspirators are dead, why have none of them told the truth on their deathbeds, or in their wills?Former FBI Beaureau chief Ted Gunderson is frequently trotted out by disinformation agents in this topic. He died a non-mysterious,death, and appeared to be using that truth as leverage of one kibd or another.
Other faux-whistle blowers have also appeared.
However, because those targeted are actually and primarily low,status individuals, they also have no academic or other authority from whichbto speak. And, of those who claimed to be targeted, many ARE frequently dead after this practice, or otherwise incapacitated via the legal monstrosity that the,US system.is.
There are many intelligence agencies associated with rival nations, with the ability to expose secrets. If, say, the United States government is running a global conspiracy, why have the French, Russian, or Chinese intelligence agencies never revealed it, to cause a major scandal in the United States (if all intelligence agencies are involved, see #2)? If they have, when and where did they do so?I have repeatefly linked to the cases of electronic weapons being used in both China, and Cuba, on diplomats, as reported widely in the MSM, and actual alteration of the,white matter in the brain of those diplomats, later verified by US government neurobiologists
I have repeatedly discussed the,actual intel agency practice of OGS targeted at diplomats in Russia, as reported in MSM
Does belief in this theory require accepting inherently contradictory premises that the conspiring entities are simultaneously hyper-competent, bone stupid, organized, clever, and hopelessly incompetent?
No. Rational analysis on a case by case badis will reveal that as agencies,workbtogethervto craft, and control a narrative of culture, all of these can exist in one narrative or case study.
To whit, in a garden variety gang stalkingin Michigan, three (bone stupid) white women sought to frame a man (AfAm) as a stalker, a pedophile, a gang member, etc. in an.(organized) manner by routinely calling cops and abusing the 911 call system.
That man, surnamed Peeples, merely wanted to establish a community garden on an empty lot. But he was,arrested,and charged many times by cops who were,just doing their jobs.
Later, that man was vindicated by a hyper-competent judge, and a cops testimony which stated,“ it aint no crime to be rakin leaves.”
Higher level gang stalking, aka, high policing takes on entirely new dimensions of,batshit crazy but that would take longer to explain.
On that note, thosecallegedly rational people at the site you cite are somewhat unhinged themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Damn, you have seriously thought your craziness through.
But I have two questions.
“if the ADL manages […] to drive someone to the brink of mass homicide” — fucking what
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Go figure. A complete rebutal to the rational wikis smear, with ample evidence, is, somehow crazy to an old queer, who is bilking British social services.
Big surprise there!
So:
I will ignore your boilerplate useful idiot ADL bait (you obviously know nothing about that racist organization) and get right to Peeples v systemic gang stalking, voiced by white females and Red Robinhood too.
I have covered all of this at my blog. I will not cite it further, to you, because you are merely a tone troll, and derailer, champ.
But I will note that I have watched, for decades, as police in my country gang stalked the Peeples entire families, from Chicago, to Milwaukee, to Detroit, stalking, slandering, and incarcerating them, and worse.
But what would a lily white old fag like you (who Masnick just ADORES and rewards,) know about black families, stomped out at the roots?
Yeah, thought so, champ.
Stick with licking Nazi Papa Underwear® and crippled-cock blocking activists, you racist, white old fucktard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So you have nothing, good, glad we got that settled. Now please, go get help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Idiot.
Stick with licking Nazi Papa Underwear®
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I think we can hire this guy, Pee Stone, and get him off the backs of Britains taxpayers.
Maybe, he can do the hard work of being a useless idiot.
Or, something else....
(cutaway to S.PEEStone, modelling Nazi Papa Underwear® in a Thai peg boy garment show)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You know, it's almost like you're triggered because you got called out on your BS and all you have left is to run around and attempt to insult the people you can't beat in a legitimate debate of facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.” — Carl Sandburg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Too true, too true.
Also a seemingly apt description of certain members of our government today.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ok
So you've got nothing then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ok
Well, I do have this, about dubious crisis Pr firms: tactics
https://www.rt.com/usa/361385-pentagon-pr-firm-terrorist-videos/
And, of course, I will personally load your service weapon with a .40, if you promise to go through with it, finally.
Just do it, brocis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So you've got nothing then, comrade.
Go through with what? I've not promised to do anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ok
Again, stop telling people to kill themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
"I recall when people like you called others conspiracy theorists when we discussed the NSA/FBIetceterus spying on ALL of us, and manufacturing terrorism."
MOST people who cared to know anything about anything already knew. It's not as if ECHELON was much of a secret. Despite all the rather imaginative attempts made by the US to keep it so.
...which underscores the point. Conspiracies can not remain hidden and the more explosive the secret is the faster it burns to the surface. Snowden revealed the exact specifications as to how pervasive the ubiquitous surveillance was and the names of the mechanism, but everyone already knew the NSA was spying on everyone.
The real issue is, as it has been for thousands of years, that the common citizenry by and large never give enough of a shit to care. Not until they find an example of government agents using citizen data for their own purposes, like an NSA operative trawling citizen sexting for wank material, for instance. At which point the herd dimly realizes that "This is...NOT OK!".
No one believes they themselves will be the one flagged by some algorithm as having three connections established to "terrorist A" and subsequently be put on a no-fly/targeted by law enforcement list. And until they are, no one gives much of a shit.
"worthwhile criticism of the police v what? Unworthwhile criticism of police? Care to provide an example of what that would look like? "
Worthwhile criticism of police;
The revelation that a precinct is using civil forfeiture to furnish their own offices.
The revelation that a high-placed FBI agent is in kahoots with the Imperial wizard of the KKK and framing prominent black civic leaders for imaginary crimes.
That a task force dedicated to fighting CP is mainly acting as a distribution ring of the same.
That a part of contemporary police culture consists of a fortress mentality with the citizenry as a whole as the potential adversary.
Unworthwhile criticism...Well, although the US situation is damn near unique in the G20 I'd still claim that very, very few join the police in order to screw citizens. Barr doesn't represent either the entirety of the DoJ or the FBI (as can be seen when in his first case against apple a well-intentioned FBI agent had a 3rd party crack the iPhone only to have Barr chewing said agent out for busting his hateboner court case against apple).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
That wasn’t Barr. That was Comey. The point still stands, however.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
Well, you arent from the US, so you cannot truly know how bizarre it is right now.
And, while I am not merely criticizing police, and have some in my family, I am aware that the road to metaphorical hell is paved with good intentions.
That you as a speaker will suffer zero consequences in the US, whereas I as a speaker have suffered life-altering blows.
And I, like Snowden and others, live outside the US now, because our processes are entirely broken by the intel-sharing/gathering model. The bad guys won, whoever,they are.
I am criticising larger social structures, institutions, and processes that are not simple to elaborate in a quip or Tweet. And I dont make a dime doing it, because my money is elsewhere.
But about your good faith in US citizens, I can assure you that while you can believe that very few join the police in order to screw citizens, I know with firsthand evidence spanning generations, that US police/intel are in fact and practice, gang members of sorts, and those who join forces are riding on generations of dirty deeds that provably sought to screw the citizens who are not them, while covering up their misdeeds.
Gang stalkers are those people and their kin. I know this, with firsthand evidence.
So, for example, most of your worldview seems to stem from second and third party evidence, while I am trying to elaborate upon processes that,lead to evidence while also playing it safe by not fully revealing things I know about those processes.
For example, you state that good criticism is "That a task force dedicated to fighting CP is mainly acting as a distribution ring of the same.”
Whereas I will state it differently: “That a task force dedicated to fighting CP(by any means necessary, because, for the children＝funding to fight “trafficking”) is mainly (covertly collaborating with) a distribution ring(s) of (people with vested interests in both the narrative, and the means and methods) of distribution, but also covert compromise operations.
You and I see things about 98% the same, minus covert and political actual conspiracy, run out of every state/federal police entity in the US.
So, when.one of these stories like the,Pensacola shooter makes waves, and the Mockingbird flaps its beak(s), the focus is on encryption, rather than intel agency strawmen of rabid jihadis who (for some reason the good guys know) had,contact with child porn.
That last bit is awfully close to “we/our allies dumped that shit on his/their phone in actions related to extreme vetting, and we need to get it back, while also keeping our strawman alive.”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm just going to call BS right here.
Actually I'm going to call BS on your entire post. If what you say is true then you should be able to provide proof of what you claim. I see none.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The fool, knowing he cannot prove his claims, will speak at great length and with great conviction in an attempt to fool you. He will say a lot of words and hope you don’t notice how he’s not really saying anything at all. (See also: Trump rallies/speeches.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
your BS called, wants its asshat back
Hilarious, myopic AC chatbot.
Sure, let me tell YOU everything, special chatbot!
You, and other ACs credibility is so solid, I will just dump years of research and interviews in your lap!
Because TDs chatbots are to be trustedmore than.other AC chatbots shat all over the net by PR firms, and intel agencies.
Idiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”
The burden of proof for your claims lies with you. Your refusal to provide proof means we don’t have to take your claims seriously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: not to be confused at all with Black P-Stone Rangers, at ALL
“Those who wear New and Improved Nazi Papa Underwear® without shitstains, often leave shitstains in them.”
-Stephen Pee Stone, British welfarecsystem bilker
get back on your meds, bro. Do you realize that anyone (other that a whack on your occipital lobe to open.your eyes while gasding you, and whacking you with a pair of Nazi Papa,Underwear®)who would provide anything to Nazi shitstain like you, our an AC would be clinically insane*?
But in Pee Stone Ready Rangers® welfare recipient caretakerworld, insane is actually, statistically (and without irony for the Assburgers deficit in their crowd), normal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If your first response is to insult me instead of actually providing links to the evidence, you aren't helping your case.
You made the claim (which goes against generally accepted reality) which means, yes, you need to tell me. Because EVERYTHING that I see and look up on the topic does not suggest to me you are correct. If you do not provide whatever evidence you think I am missing that will convince me, then I will never accept your argument as correct because I can't verify it myself.
Why thank you.
I would love it if you did. You've yet to do so. So the years of research and interviews that I do have access to take precedence and none of those suggest you are correct.
No one is saying you should trust us more. All we are saying is:
Evidence or GTFO.
Alternatively:
Evidence or it didn't happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Stop listening to those voices in your head.
There is no "us” only “you” a person/ AI chatbot that thinks it is more than one person, as evidenced by your comment above.
I.mean, real people have my actual email, can you dig it?
Only a computer, or a schizophrenic (schizo, as defined by the outdated and bizarrely retro 1950s era DSM4-5 which still condoned/accepted lobotomy as a legitimate surgical procedure) woul even imagine that a person.with multiple personalities,(evidenced by your use of "us” as you post as an individual).
So, theres that.
Flag harder! Derail MORE! Earn Less Trust NOW!®
Everything that you see, and look up on the topic, hull?
Google “the effects of chronic surveillance” for a real eye opener about government astroturfing.
But do it only when you are in your right mind
Theres only one you bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Um, no. They mean “us” as in “people reading or involved in this discussion besides you”.
Real people also don’t have your actual email. It’s not like you’ve provided it here, nor have given us any identifying information to search for you with. Why would you expect every person to have your email address?
Again, you haven’t registered that trademark with the USPTO or any other official government trademark body, so you should be using the little TM symbol, not the circle-R.
Also, asking for evidence and talking about what you’ve said in this comment section isn’t derailing.
Uhhh, that’s not me. See where it says “Anonymous Coward” instead of “bhull242”, and how next to that it has a colored, patterned square instead of a black silhouette of the profile of a generic person? That means it’s not me. I don’t post anonymously, in case you haven’t noticed.
First of all, I’m not doing your research for you. Second, we’re asking for specific evidence for your specific claims.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I would but you won't shut up.
No, I can't. But how about you dig this, nobody has everyone else's email address, nor is that a requirement for intelligent discussion.
I'mma just refer you to take an English 101 class and leave it at that.
Yes. Though what boat hulls have to do with it I have no idea.
Putting that into google nets me results ranging from the CDC to articles about tracking cookies on the web. Nothing regarding all pervasive government astroturfing (which, by the way, is not the same thing as surveillance). One begins to wonder who the real chatbot is here.
Petty insult aside, what would that even matter? Search engines don't care what state of mind I am in when I put in the search terms and press enter. Searching for the same string of text when I'm happy, mad, sad, etc... should return the exact same results each time. Therefore, if you want me to look at something specific, give me a specific link, because those search terms don't back up your case at all.
You're absolutely correct. However there are multiple commenters replying to you in this thread. Hence the appropriate use of "us".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I laughed when I read this. For what it’s worth, ROGS was probably referring to me, though I’m also unsure why I was brought up, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm assuming that he was referencing you too, perhaps thinking it was you replying and had forgotten to log in. Either way it didn't make any sense so I decided to run with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:And you are...?
My goal was not to alienate you, my goal was to educate whoever will listen, and reflect.
This conversation, spread over five threads, spanning weeks, contains many claims, and,I have provided many links, but very, very few counter claims, or even solid refutation, except for bhull242, and SDM, who have both acknowleged that gang stalking is, real in some cases.
Keep in mind, TDs flag system, and regular trolls who abuse it, is designed for easy use by:
crisis PR firms
Astroturfing military contractors
Astroturfing NGO troll farms
corporate shills like Big Pharma®, employing troll armies to push psychiatric meta -narrative “your delusional! Get back on your meds!”
race baiting chatbots like you
Squad 8200/Talpion/Technion tech friendly profilers and professional derailers
It enables,a process called psychic driving reminiscent of the MKULTRA era of punitive, experimental psychology. I mean, I could go on, AC chatbot, but you get the idea, right?
Oh, and here below is some
proof of how Silicon Valley Mossadi jihadis in communication with the IDF use sexual blackmail against gay and, “othered ” Palestinians
after entraping, and stalking, and harassing them in bizarre ways online, and off aka organized (Irgunized? ) gang stalking:
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/dont-single-out-homosexuality-response-i srael-blackmail-revelations-palestinians
CVE and the religious ponerologists who deploy it (from Silicon Valley ) is designed to appeal to the status quo, AC, who all sigh gee, Im glad it wasnt me; and CVE is designed to create terrorists, by dehumanizing human beings first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, you failed.
You also failed there too.
Most of which are either unreliable or, while related and reliable, don't support your claims or only contain anecdotal evidence. Not verifiable proof of widespread abuse and flouting of the law.
Sorry you can't read.
I disagree.
As have I. Stop trying to twist my words.
It's not designed that way. That doesn't mean it would not be easy for trolls to abuse it. However, what does that have to do with anything?
No, it really doesn't. It's called people don't agree with you and flag it. Not everything is a government conspiracy.
Yes I do. You're mentally unstable and/or a troll.
Sorry, I thought we were discussing the actions of American government and law enforcement.
As for the rest, I have no idea what CVE is other than a rating and tracking system for known cybersecurity bugs and software vulnerabilities that need to be patched.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
For the record, CVE stands for “countering [or combatting] violent extremists [or extremism]” (I can’t recall the exact terms, but that should give you the gist of it), and it apparently refers to members of various government agencies and police departments engaging in certain (arguably questionable or disturbing) tactics that are ostensibly meant to combat (alleged) terrorists or potential terrorists, including “manufacturing terrorists”, “online profiling”, “organized gang stalking”, infiltrating message boards to demoralize or discredit targeted groups/individuals, etc. At least, that’s how I understand the term in this context.
Now, whether such programs exist in each of the forms alleged, which cases of gang stalking, mass shootings, terrorism, trolling, etc. are connected to such CVE programs, what “manufactured terrorism” actually is, and whether any of the people establishing, running, implementing, engaging in, or speaking on behalf of such programs actually refer to them as “CVE” (as opposed to just the ones making claims about them like our mutual friend here) are still debatable. However, I felt it best to explain what CVE meant it this context in order to help you properly debate on this subject.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thanks for clarifying that. I did a quick search for it but all I got was the cybersecurity threat tracking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
"Well, you arent from the US, so you cannot truly know how bizarre it is right now."
Assuming a tenth of what I see and hear in the various news outlets and forums i visit is real, i stopped at "beggars belief" because that's when "bizarre" stops holding any meaning. From what I can read and see you guys are about two race riots away from another civil war - or would be, if you could draw a line in sand between the north and south.
Ferguson would in itself have counted as the standard fare of a country in a permanent state of low-intensity civil war.
"That you as a speaker will suffer zero consequences in the US, whereas I as a speaker have suffered life-altering blows."
It's one of those reasons which have me meeting suggestion that I ought to move across the pond with a disbelieving laugh. In europe we still take for granted that the one who holds the violence monopoly must be under stricter surveillance, not less. That the reverse is true in the states is outright terrifying.
"I can assure you that while you can believe that very few join the police in order to screw citizens, I know with firsthand evidence spanning generations, that US police/intel are in fact and practice, gang members of sorts, and those who join forces are riding on generations of dirty deeds that provably sought to screw the citizens who are not them, while covering up their misdeeds."
At least when it comes to the state of the US police I have...few arguments. Still, very few join up with the intent to be perpetrators rather than defenders, and whether a given police officer is or is not a gang member largely depends on the specific culture of the precinct in question.
We've seen examples of a few very notable "law enforcement" officers in recent posts here on TD and they seem to share the history of having been consistently shuffled around departments until they found that one precinct which would tolerate and protect them. It's a variant of Peter's Principle in action.
"“That a task force dedicated to fighting CP(by any means necessary, because, for the children＝funding to fight “trafficking”) is mainly (covertly collaborating with) a distribution ring(s) of (people with vested interests in both the narrative, and the means and methods) of distribution..."
And that, right there, is taking a reasonable assumption and taking it into irrational hypothesis.
Actively weaponizing CP is something which could have earned several administrations good short-term gains and yet...zip. Do dickbags in law enforcement exist who'll plant evidence? Assuredly, some get caught almost daily. Is it an organized attempt to do so? No.
Once again you don't need a Grand Design for assholes and douchebags to act according to their nature. CP is just that easy weapon to obtain and use, as is that little plastic bag with white powder in it.
"You and I see things about 98% the same, minus covert and political actual conspiracy, run out of every state/federal police entity in the US."
Because empirical observation comes up with the fact that it's impossible for humans to pull of a conspiracy in the long run, and it's infeasible and impractical for any organization to even try. It's also - and this clinches it, really, undesirable and redundant.
Conspiracy theorists have been trying to find a pattern about how "The Man" tries to screw/indoctrinate/exploit/contain the citizenry since the dawn of recorded history. In the end that's just a hopeful desire to find order in what is essentially chaos and human pattern recognition desperately tricking the conscious mind into observing links where none exist, or weighting observations to produce conclusions which aren't, in the end, rational.
No one claims a school of thousands of fish or a flock of birds can maintain an eerily accurate swarming pattern which should demand complex plans and coordinating by some form of leadership. And yet we so dearly WANT to believe that humans need leadership in order to move as a herd.
Covert and political conspiracies do not largely exist simply because human nature will move exactly the way that it does in reality entirely without the need of ANY leadership beyond a few triggers sparking the hostility and formation of a swarm.
The greatest irony might just be that people like Barr, Cheney and Bolton are themselves great conspiracy theorists, perceiving natural opposition as evidence that there are coordinated plans to oppose them. It's not surprising to see a politician sounding like a paranoid schizophrenic when s/he slips up - they've become so used to that one hammer they're holding, everything else just becomes a nail in their eyes.
"So, when.one of these stories like the,Pensacola shooter makes waves, and the Mockingbird flaps its beak(s), the focus is on encryption, rather than intel agency strawmen of rabid jihadis who (for some reason the good guys know) had,contact with child porn."
Because, by all empirical observable evidence, what we have is a murderer with a history of religious extremism who happens to be dead, and an accuser who insists there's a wider ring of would-be shooters to be caught who is, by now, grasping after every straw he can to leverage that presumptive ring of would-be murderers (and, of course, pedos) as a crowbar with which to break the idea that individuals should be allowed to encrypt their devices in such a way that law enforcement can't just unlock them willy-nilly.
Encryption is one of the weapons individuals can use against government-employed conspiracy theorists like Barr to whom everyone who insists on having a private life MUST be a suspicious terrorist sympathizer.
So naturally we focus on dismantling Barr's crackpot strawman argument first of all because that's the weapon he tries to use to take away vital defenses from everyone else.
It is still unlikely anyone needs to have planted any evidence whatsoever on the phone in question for Barr to make his assertions. Three degrees of separation has everyone - you, me, the entire population of the western world - being "in contact" with whatever flavor of bogeyman you care to name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
Curiously, I wasVm watching tribes of egrets just this morning, fighting over river turf.
There is no order other than thhe tyranny of majoritarian rule, with the occasional interloper accosted and chased, until his own tribe/flock comes to his rescue.
That aside, from your partisan viewpoint about Barr/Trump (for example, the Clinton and Obama/ Comey machines did EXACTLY what the Bush Trump teams did/are doing in this area), your not half bad.
But you are incorrect on this point:
It is still unlikely anyone needs to have planted any evidence whatsoever on the phone
One of the most powerful keys to unlocking a persons mind is their sexuality. And, in compromise operations, the key to controlling an asset is controlling their secrets, and leveraging them based upon levels of shame, aka, shame based programming.
So, while the carcdealer in Michigan is easilly led to becoming an informant in a plate swapping scheme, where he gets busted in a motel room with a hooker supplied by the now defunct Backpage.com, , the Saudi royal who occassionally makes the news is a harder target, and as such, requires an escalated level of compromise.
So, no its not unlikely at all that evidence of what they call contact with CP is NOT necessary, because in dialectic space, it is,ABSOLUTELY neccessary because of the psychological factors involved in a closed loop communication process.
So, i.e., the target has in theory (and proven practice), only one place to go after being targeted this way, and obviously, that one place is the host government and its,good guys and gallies
Otherwise, they are bad people for not playing along, and remaining loyal to their own countries services, and reporting mechanisms.
A sordid, shitty, Catch 22.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy the
Real quickly, I just wanted to point out the flaw in this:
I’m pretty sure I recall Stephen, Techdirt, and many others criticizing Obama and Comey about that heavily while it was happening. They probably would have criticized Clinton too—assuming that he did the same thing (which is unlikely because we didn’t have the same technology back then)—if it wasn’t for the fact that this site didn’t exist back then. So there’s nothing partisan about what Stephen is saying in this area.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
I gotta take a flight right now, and will read your full post later.
But this: Ferguson would in itself have counted as the standard fare of a country in a permanent state of low-intensity civil war.
You might like to know that during that time period, my internet connection was routinely Carnivore-slow, or redirected through strange IPs, that I live traced to Fusion Center-type hosts.
I would have to go back a few years, but as I recall, my connections always redirected through a provider in Tennessee, who is/was one of those companies that specifically was allocated to government and law enforcement, and more specifically, hadnt hidden its association yet in Whois.
And then, Ferguson activists dying in "mysterious circumstances” thereafter, like, shooting themselves dead after being pulled over by “mysterious gang strike forces” and THEN starting their cars on fire to hide the evidence of suicide.
RIP Darren Seals, we tried:
https://www.inquisitr.com/3489569/darren-daren-seals-facebook-snapchat-seals-death-killed-act ivists-twitter-tweet-about-10-cops-pulling-guns-on-him-gets-buzz/
F@ck me.... TDs crowd wants ADL Rights NOW!® or Stephen PEE Stone Rangers right to ramble on about Trump, while some of us are dying.more than others of us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
Which is why we have Occam’s Razor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy the
Occams razor also posits that people LG ke bhull who are admittedly diagnosed as Aspergers /autistic will ALWAYS be a fruitless, circular, closed loop and a, waste of time, because you literally live in a different psychological world, backed by an online life of passive aggressiveness.
Only in Aspergers world do people participate in forums with factitious disordered persons and in -house trolls, feeding them endlessly, as,I,state repeatedly, Im.not feeding.you anymore.
Also asking you kindly to please leave me alone, just go away, and,stop cyberstalking my posts .
Or, would you care to cite the TD written rule that you reference, i.e. “When being attacked in a forum by Aspergers assholes, cowardly anon posters, and freakish path-narcs and sadists, always feed them for free.”
Or that other rule, that say explicitly “all comments must be written for Aspergers types, pseudo -skeptics, faux rationalists, and ONLY include arguments that are legally acceptable according to the JTRIG/COINTELPRO derailers handbook rules, (which said derailers themselves flaunt with impunity )? ”
Pearls before the swine indeed.
bhull, you are not the company I seek, nor care about, and you are literally a slow fuck derailer with Aspbergers..
And, outside of the view from the Aspergers seats, some of us seek deeper conversations, or other things, like, causing the right questions to be asked, or even simply raising awareness.
So, Occams in this case says "stop feeding bhulls mental disorder. ”
BUT: Feel free to peek in at my conversation with SDM, he/she /they has an interesting view from the not-crazy bleachers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So when are you going to start providing one?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy
Again, you show that you understand none of the things you’re talking about. Not Asperger’s. Not Occam’s Razor. Not derailing. Not trolling. Not cyberstalking. None of it.
And I did view that conversation. There was no fundamental difference on SDM’s end. I fully agree with them on this subject. If anything, I was more cordial.
Finally, I’ve lost track of how many times you said you’d stop responding to me. Why should I expect any different this time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy
For the record, here is what I’ve been doing:
Someone posted something that I had something to say about, so I did. I also, as I do for nearly every thread I post something on, opt into receiving email alerts for new comments on this thread in case anything else interesting pops up. I do this frequently, including a number of threads that you aren’t in and threads where there isn’t any real disagreement going on. And when I get an alert for a comment on which I have something to say, then I post a reply on it.
That isn’t cyberstalking. I’m not targeting you in particular. There are a number of times where I got an alert for something you posted and decided there was no particular reason for me to say anything, and there have been a number of times someone else has posted something that I choose to respond to. Don’t be so full of yourself. I focus my attention on the content, not the person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspi
re: There are a number of times where I got an alert for something you posted
An alert? OH NOOOES! TD moderates in Fusion Center: ALPR Reloaded mode now?
Or, is this a confession of some kind that you do, or do not work for TD, or another poser attempt to sound more connected to a world that you are discinnected from?
I have asked you before, and you dodged the question.
Regardless, I am stymied at how to get rid of you following my every post, with lies, and Aspergers/factitious disorder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not sure if you’ve noticed this, champ, but there’s a toggle option at the bottom of the post box that says “email me when there are new comments on this thread”. bhull isn’t “stalking” you; they’re following the discussion thread. Your continual shitposting sends them a new notification each time you post. If’n you wanna stop the “stalking” of your comments, stop making comments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Co
You may want to reread the rest of my post, particularly this line:
(Emphasis added.) See, I get an alert for those, too. I’m following this thread, not you. Whether it’s you, Stephen, SDM, Zog, tp, That Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Anonymous Coward, Wendy, a random AC, Hamilton, out_of_the_blue, toom, Masnick, or anyone else (other than myself while signed in), I get an alert for every comment in this thread, along with several other threads.
And it’s pretty easy, too, at least if you have an account. When writing a new comment, there’s a checkbox with the following label:
On mobile, it appears below the radio buttons labeled, “Use markdown,” and “Use plain text,” which are in turn below the textbox in which you write the comment you want to post. By checking that box and then submitting the comment, I get added to a mailing list for this thread and get an email alert any time anyone who isn’t signed in under my account posts a new comment in the same comment section. Anyone with an account can easily do this with any thread, and it’s no big secret or anything.
No, this is not a case of TD moderation, a confession that I work for TD in any capacity (or anyone else in particular), evidence that I am “another poser attempt to sound more connected to a world that you are discinnected from” (sic), or anything like that. In fact, I will state upfront that I do not currently and have never previously worked for TD, any of its owners/operators or any other website in any capacity, nor do I have any affiliation with TD or any of its owners/operators beyond having a free user account on TD.
Additionally, I have absolutely zero interest in how connected to or disconnected from any world (other than, y’know, reality) I sound to you or anyone else. As long as you have some valid reason for your opinions of me (as in based on things I have actually said or done, without assuming race, gender, religion, sexuality, etc., and/or on true, proven facts), I honestly don’t care about your opinion of me, and I only care about the exceptions when you show clear ignorance, make assumptions seemingly out of nowhere, mischaracterize what I’ve said or done, or make false claims, and then only to the extent to correct the record or seek clarification. I’m not interested in changing your opinion of me.
I believe that the above should constitute a more than sufficient answer to your question, though I don’t recall it ever being the case where you asked about whether I work for TD and I didn’t respond in the negative or… that thing about trying to seem more connected to the world than I actually am or whatever. I could be wrong, or it’s possible I thought the question was merely rhetorical and not worth addressing. At any rate, I have now addressed that question, so that should take care of your complaint in that regard.
First, you again seem to believe that people with Asperger’s have some sort of disconnect with facts or reality or that we cannot be convinced to change our minds. This is completely false. We have a certain disconnect with social norms, nonverbal communication, somewhat with empathy, and in expressing or identifying emotions. And as far as viewpoints go, they tend to be more rational rather than emotional (except in some cases when it messes with our routine), or they simply involve noticing things others would miss while missing things others might feel are obvious. As far as changing minds go, I’m far more interested in making sense and being rational than being right, and so I’m more than willing to change my mind given sufficient reason to do so, especially in areas I lack particularized knowledge or experience in. Plus, I’m actually not the sort of person to form strong, rash judgments or opinions in nearly any situation. I may form an initial impression, but it is generally weak, moderate, and very open to change with further information. That you have been unsuccessful in convincing me only shows that your evidence has been weak or nonexistent in terms of supporting your claims. At any rate, your attempt to equate Asperger’s with the made-up term “factitious disorder” has no basis in reality.
Second, what lies have I told? Seriously, every statement of fact I’ve made that wasn’t about me was easily verifiable and clearly true. Everything else has been pure opinion or opinion based on disclosed facts. Those aren’t lies. And unless you have some evidence I’m lying about me, I haven’t made any statement that one could look at and reasonably say, based on the evidence, that I was lying. If I have made a false statement of fact, then it was unintentional. Please point to any “lies” I have told, so that I may address them.
As for getting rid of me, setting aside the fact that I’m not following you to begin with, the only way to do that would be to comment in a thread I am not following and hope I don’t end up following it later. Of course there is no way for you to know with certainty which threads I am not following, especially not ahead of time, unless I haven’t yet posted anything in that thread. And even if you do find a thread I’m not following yet, I may decide to do so in the future. I don’t exactly have any firm rules about which threads I decide to follow or not follow.
But yeah, much like how we can’t really do anything about you posting claims without sufficient evidence or posting the exact same thing over and over again, you can’t really stop me from getting alerts to your comments in any thread I am following, such as this one. And again, I’m not following you. I’m following the thread, which you just so happen to be posting in. And there are a number of comments of yours I haven’t replied to. Again, it’s not all about you. If I have something I want to say, I’ll say it. I really don’t care who said it. I’m more interested in addressing content over people. (That may be related to my autism, and also why I rarely call anyone a troll unless they explicitly state they are a troll or confess to trollish behavior with trollish motives. Same with liar or other, related insults.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
I think you need to either
a ) re -read what is available in the purged literature of the COINTELPRO /MKULTRA era, and / or
b ) study closely TDscreporting about manufactured terrorism, and the aFBIs urgency to get to shooters phones first before journalists do.
Keep an image of Winny the Pooh in mind, shouting into the abyss.
re: Actively weaponizing CP and the now -reported P2P shenanigans of hive minded services hash tagging and flagging their own allies /co -conspirators.
Then, also keep in mind that some factions of US law enforcement and their British hosts at RAF Croughton were so disgusted with US psyops back in 2010 that the Brits almost kicked us out.
I mean, sure, the Pentagon Papers once looked like simplecdissent, and spies, much as,we see with Assange /Greenwald today.
Guess who will get prison time, versus a free pass?
Either way, as long as you and others use Occams razor, instead of Ochams [sic ] Razor of CVE stalking, the bad guys win.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy the
I’m not sure how you expect me to know how to access any purged literature, especially when you won’t actually tell me what that literature is or where I can find it (even setting aside that “Google it” is insufficient, I don’t even know what you want me to Google in the first place). At any rate, the burden of proof is on you, and I’m not doing your research for you.
I have. Quite extensively, actually. None of it gives any credence to your specific claims. If anything, the reporting suggests that the FBI have not made any after-the-fact attempts to conceal how they manufacture terrorists or which ones are manufactured from the public, which suggests that they feel no need to make-up terrorists and present them as real, genuine terrorists in which they played no role in convincing them to do so. That kinda goes against your claims. As for the FBI or other LEOs urgently trying to get access to shooters’ phones before journalists is neither surprising nor nefarious. It could have evidence, and letting journalists have access first risks spoliation of evidence. It’s no different from them wanting access to a crime scene, a murder weapon, a corpse, etc. before journalists or other civilians. They don’t and shouldn’t always get what they want in this regard, and occasionally they may be a bit overzealous, but it’s perfectly understandable and usually benign if not a good thing. It’s usually the means or other circumstances around the issue that are problematic, not trying to get the phones before journalists.
I have no idea what Pooh has to do with anything. Can we please leave fictional characters from children’s media out of this?
[citation needed]
I do recall something along these lines, but, “X did A, B, and C, which are bad,” doesn’t exactly prove that, “X also did D, E, and F, which are also bad.” I am well aware that some factions of US law enforcement do bad things, but that doesn’t mean that every bad thing they ever get accused of is true. Still, I will accept this particular statement as true, at least for now.
As I understand this particular issue and what you’re saying about it, I agree. I don’t see evidence for your particular claims about CP and such, but yeah, I am aware of these questionable-at-best aspects of our government and law enforcement, and I don’t defend them.
I… what? Occam’s Razor is just about which of multiple possible explanations for certain evidence/facts/events/phenomena should be favored if all else is equal. (Same goes for Hanlon’s Razor, for the record.) Basically, a massive conspiracy (e.g. cyberstalking someone) is more complex (requires more assumptions) than the alternatives (e.g. some individual assholes), so without specific evidence that favors the conspiracy theory over the alternative, the conspiracy theory will be disfavored. That’s just rational thinking.
I have no idea who this “Ocham” [sic] is, what his/her Razor entails, or how that would apply here. I mean, it seems to have something to do with the “Counter Violent Extremism” (CVE) programs and cyberstalking you’ve been going on about, but that doesn’t actually explain what this “Ocham[‘]s [] Razor” is or what it means, so how could I apply it?
As for the bad guys winning, Occam’s Razor is not an insurmountable obstacle (nor is Hanlon’s Razor). Note that it is used in situations where other factors are more or less equal. If there is significantly more substantial evidence that favors the more complex explanation, the complex explanation will win out despite Occam’s Razor. These logical Razors are meant to perform a balancing test and to simplify discussions. They aren’t the end-all, be-all of logical/rational discussions or arguments. If you cannot overcome Occam’s Razor (or Hanlon’s Razor or Hitchen’s Razor), then that means that your argument is weak or the facts are not on your side. Logic doesn’t care about good and evil, per se. That you may dislike the results or that the results are unfavorable is immaterial. That is an argument from adverse consequences or an argument from emotion, which are fallacies.
Plus, things aren’t always black and white. You remember how you keep talking about “nuance”? Well, some nuances you seem to ignore include the fact that not every FBI agent or LEO has the sort of mindset you presume (despite the fact that you explicitly acknowledged this fact), that not everything is connected, that people doing some bad things doesn’t prove that they do others, and even so-called “bad guys” may do the right thing on occasion. People can do good things with bad intent, and people can do bad things with good intent. You know Hanlon’s Razor? One of the motivations behind it is to recognize nuances in people’s intent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bhull Aspergers, and the negative effects of Aspergers
bhull/aspergers , youre really a disingenuous, lying, timesucking drag, and specifically, you are NOT nor can ever be anything other than a TD fanboi concern troll, and a police -state enabler.
And you are proving it every day.
To whit:
“I’m not sure how you expect me to know how to access any purged literature, especially when you won’t actually tell me what that literature is....”
As I stated repeatedly in the last few weeks, you are not equipped to have this conversation, and you are a classic derailer, constantly asking for a free education that you will never use.
bhull and the Effects of Aspergers in online dialectic space
Others here on this forum have had similar experiences with you, and your unchecked mental illness that takes the form.of argumentativeness only for the sake of arguing, or as passive aggression directed at words and speakers online, and I hope you get the help you need.
I specifically do not care about you, or your commentary, and only respond to you because others are looking in every time you lie about, or attempt to discredit me, or the material I present.
Post after post, you ask for citation after citation, and having zero substantive and aggravating binary commentary after I cite it, because your intentions are, 100% Aspergers driven factitious disorder, augmented by your clear intention of selfish, narcissistic gratification.
Hey, Mom, and everybody else, LOOK, someone talked to me today!
As such, you dont actually engage with any evidence, ever. I tried, for a year here, and you just are too stupid to have an actual conversation.
So, for the curious(has anyone else here had this experience with bhull, or other Aspergers patients? ):
re: Ochams Razor [sic ] is a reference to one specific Israelified/militarized counter terrorism trainer named Gabe Suarez (one out of tens of thousands ) who trains cops and others how to utiluze CVE tactics in civiluan spaces to stalk, harass, or subvert peace protesters, dissidents, activists and others and how to undermine free speech, via CVE.
Suarez stated stated that as regards Israeli trained CVE “We slice our victims throats with Ochams Razor,” meaning that in Counter terrorism operations directed at civilians, CVE professionals DELIBERATELY use tactics that defy logic, or rational explanations as they target individuals.
And that means that Occams /Hanlons /Hitchens exist in an entirely different logical, and legal realm.
Then, not long after I publicized that fact and quote, he changed his website to eliminate that quote, and I havent found it there since.
As for burdens of proof, every media forum is not full of Aspergers disordered persons like yourself, who have trivial luves, primarily spent online.
And, not every forum comment here or elsewhere is structured as a niggling, quibbling, legalistic argument that,satisfies the Aspergers afflucted pseudo -rationalists such as yourself, especially when raising awareness about fringe or marginalized topics, where we employ different rhetorical ploys to influence others.
In.other words, you are impising a,set of rules upin this dialogue that works quite well in.your binary i /o world, but has zero relevance outside of it, or as applied to CVE programs.
So, for you to stupidly, conceitedly, annoyingly and with malice assume that my comments -which you, personally, for some reason cant stop reading -are directed at people like you, instead of those afflicted by organized gang stalking, whose level of awareness exists outside of your sheltered world (there in your moms basement ), and those people often, live literally in the streets.
So, your enabling of police-state activity is duly noted here:
“ If anything, the reporting suggests that the FBI have not made any after-the-fact attempts to conceal how they manufacture terrorists,”
And here:
“don’t and shouldn’t always get what they want in this regard, and occasionally they may be a bit overzealous, but it’s perfectly understandable and usually benign”*
essentially proves that youre lily white, too stupid for discussion on these topics ass is in fact why I wont be spending much future time replying to you.
You are a police misconduct apologist.
bhull, maybe its your Aspergers Syndrome getting in the way, or maybe you really are just a derailing, disingenuous, police state enabling piece of shit.
But your position is clear: You are totally out of touch with anything other than yourself.
For you to say that, above,
bhull: “ The police are occasionally a bit overzealous, but it’s perfectly understandable and usually benign”
What world do you live in where rampant police misconduct, brutality, unlawful over -reach, or hidden and deliberately occluded investigative methods based in ponerology, junk police science, and good faith exceptions OK?
Worse, you said that with a straight face (actually, an emoji, in your world ) is virtual proof you are either a bot, a conservative, or a sadistic moron with no concern for the effects of police misconduct on the masses.
No rational person, anywhere would say that, and I havent seen Techdirt, or the general arch of its reportage indicating agreement with your position either.
In other words, YOU, personally are not worth the time it takes to educate you, personally.
So, in re, how you imagine that the burden of proof for anything* that I say, and that you then malign, derail, or otherwise fail to engage with, isnt a burden at all: its proof of your malicious intent to derail the overall purpose of my commentary.
As such, its refreshing now, to lift that burden off, and in the future,address you only to others, here at TD who have also been affected by your conduct.
You, bhull, by the nature of your running smear, derailing, and now, your admission of condolences for the criminal actions of police, are in fact, revealed as a police -state enabler and apologist.
I will only address you to others here that way going forwards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative effects of Aspergers
There are a number of cases that go beyond the pale. I have a lot of criticisms for the modern police-state mentality that seems rampant in our government. “Understandable” does not mean “acceptable”, “good”, or “reasonable”. I will retract the term “benign”, however. My intent was never to defend government overreach.
Regardless, what I’m saying is that there’s no single, massive conspiracy here. It’s all perfectly explainable as individual officers or departments looking out for their own best interests and being overzealous. I also don’t see evidence in the particular case you cited that that was government overreach or abuse of power. There are many legitimate cases where overreach or abuse of power is clear, so why you keep citing cases where that isn’t so is beyond me.
If you read my comments in other threads, you’d see that I have spoken out against police going to far. I have been appalled by many cops who got away with horrific or unreasonable acts thanks to QI and general lack of accountability. I’ve also made clear that I think that Barr’s position on encryption is completely unreasonable. That in this one case I don’t believe there’s enough evidence to suggest he was completely wrong in one area doesn’t make me a “police-state enabler and apologist”. I don’t condone illegal acts by police, of which there have been too many to list. However, some of what you call “illegal acts” doesn’t appear to have any evidence that the police did anything that was actually illegal.
Also, do you have any evidence whatsoever that anyone other than you has a problem with me or my approach? In case you hadn’t noticed, in this very thread, SDM—who you claim to think is reasonable to discuss with—used Occam’s Razor to dismiss your claims of a conspiracy. Many others, such as Stephen, have also applied Occam’s Razor or Hitchen’s Razor at various points, and have also asked you for evidence. Yes, some people resort to emotional tactics, but we mostly go for logical and rational discussions. You’re the odd one out here. I admit to having differences in some approaches, but not drastically, and it’s mostly in terms of hesitance to call people names or make accusations of trollish behavior—you know, being civil.
Even if I disagree in some manner with others here in this one thread, do you have any evidence that this is anything but an anomoly? (And incidentally, I actually agreed with SDM, in case you hadn’t noticed.)
Not to mention, do you have anyone who agrees with you on this? Specifically regarding the conspiracy?
And you think I failed to engage with you? On several occasions, I went into detail explaining each issue I had with what you said and responded to your replies. In the very comment you’re addressing, I specifically said that I agreed with you on certain points.
As for the “smear” accusation, what have I said about you that was demonstrably false?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative effects of Aspergers
SDM is now on record acknowleging that gang stalking is a real phenomenon but relegates it to bioligical herd behavior, and mobbing, while denying its victims main claim: that there is organization or organizations behind it.
So, let me stop you right here @conspiracy, while showing you Gawker medias take on Scientologists organized as a gang of stalkers, and which calls them such (and in concurrence with Village Voice):
https://gawker.com/5794223/meet-the-bizarre-scientology-stalking-squad
So, what you are doing, unlike SDM, is smearing me directly, and by proxy, and discrediting the topic itself, by repeatedly linking the word conspiracy to my posts, bhull /autism /ASD case study, and thereby empowering only those who have the power to abuse others in this fashion.
You arent the first /wont be the last to do it, TD King for a Day.
So stop inferring that you are somehow engaged or concerned with the topic, or victims of these state /institutional practices, when ample evidence of highly organized groups who do this shit can be found in many cases, whereas in others, the level of organization are less /more substantiated.
So, keep it up with your broad brush, and your police state enabling.
And, I will continue to provide a public service by validating the complaints of people targeted by bizarre pseudo-investigations aka weaponized investigations aka colluding parallel investigations that are used all across the west now, because time wasters like you have a problem with the phrase organized gang stalking, and activelly subvert its meaning, via these types of smears of those who publicize it.
Just because you have never taken a stand for anything and then been stalked and harassed for it doesnt mean others havent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative effects of Asperge
Look, what SDM said and what I’m saying are the same thing. Also, when I say “conspiracy”, I don’t quite mean it in the sense of “crazy theory”; I mean it as in “two or more people or entities conspiring to work to achieve a specific goal secretly”. Are you saying that you are not alleging such a thing? I’m sorry if you consider that a “smear”, but I thought I made it quite clear that the NSA spying issue, which is indisputably true and wrongful, is a conspiracy, so that when I say conspiracy, I don’t intend to diminish the claim per se by alleging it’s “just some wacky conspiracy theory”.
Look, all three of us (SDM, you, and me) all agree that gang stalking is a real phenomenon that actually occurs. You, however, assert that there is some organization to the phenomenon, that there’s something behind it all. SDM and I believe it’s entirely explainable with just basic psychology like herd behavior and mob mentality, and so the “organization” theory is unnecessary and therefore unproven. We may be using slightly different words, but the gist is still the same. And it is the extent of this “organization” behind gang stalking that separates you from SDM and me.
I don’t recall using or subverting the term “organized gang stalking”; my understanding was that it was like random gang stalking only with some organization behind it. Is that incorrect?
Re: Scientology, I believe a lot of people believe they’re highly questionable at best, but Gawker isn’t exactly the most reliable source, and while it suggests that there are some cases of gang stalking that are organized, I still say that the majority are not. Still, that is a decent example of, as you call it, “organized gang stalking”, even if it doesn’t involve state action.
Anyway, the only one using a broad brush is you, assuming every state or police action that doesn’t quite seem right must be part of a conspiracy and/or must have insidious intent behind it, lumping all ACs together into one category as being “AI chatbots” despite a complete lack of evidence, assuming that every or a majority of gang stalking incidents must be organized, and that everyone (except one token person you seem to select for arbitrary reasons) who doesn’t fully agree with everything you say is working against you. My intent was never to smear you, nor to diminish the suffering of those who were genuine victims of gang stalking, nor to enable a police-state.
In case you hadn’t noticed, I often first look at each incident in isolation before judging it. How is that smearing with a broad brush, exactly?
Still, despite our differences, can we at least agree on the following points?
Gang stalking is a real phenomenon.
At least some incidents of gang stalking are organized to at least some extent.
At least some incidents of gang stalking have relatively little to no organization behind it, or at least little to no evidence of such.
People are genuinely hurt by gang stalking.
Many people in power are too eager to use, misuse, and abuse it.
Intelligence agencies and LEOs generally show far too little respect for our rights.
The FBI has, on multiple occasions, manufactured terrorists.
The DEA has, on multiple occasions, manufactured criminals.
There have been at least some occasions where LEOs have forged, manufactured, planted, and/or misconstrued evidence to secure an arrest or convicition.
The NSA and GCHQ collaborated to execute a plan of online psychological warfare of sorts targeting alleged terrorists. (For the record, this could include manufactured terrorists, but not necessarily.)
Journalism and activism are both very important to our democracy.
Free speech is very important.
People have taken a stand and been stalked and harassed for it.
There may be other points we could agree on, but can we at least agree on these, at least to start with?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative effects of Asp
Yes, we agree on all of those points.
No: have you been following the case if Ahmaud Arbery where we saw:
an actual gang of three to five people conspire, and stalk and finally, murder Arbery; and these related events happened over a period if three years or more
one member of the gang was a retired cop, working with prosecutors, and literally chatting on the phone with the police call center as he stalked Arbery
This same cop and prosecutor and police force had been shadowing Arbery for YEARS before the actual murder
an actual attempt was made of poluce actually attempting to use an “electronic weapin ” on Arbery, in the form of a Taser. Horrifying video evidence exists
All of that is good enough evidence, and empirical “proof ” for me that gang stalking is what Is say it is.
And, then, theres the case of George Floyd, who you might have heard about too.
Similar facts exist in that case too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative effects of
Odd that it took so long to get a reply, but whatever.
Good. Glad we have some common ground.
I have not. I’ll look it up later and see what I think of it.
Having gone through the list, I’d like to point out that, by your own admission, at least one of those people gang-stalking someone is being investigated, which tends to undermine the idea that this was a widespread conspiracy.
More importantly, though, 1) I already said that at least some instances of organized gang stalking do exist; 2) none of that is empirical evidence, just a single anecdote; and 3) even if true, none of it really tends to favor your interpretation over mine of gang stalking as a whole. I’m not saying it’s bad evidence per se, but it’s not really definitive evidence of a trend or large-scale conspiracy.
Again, though, I’ll have to look it up to say anything more about that.
Really? I mean, I’ve heard about the case, sure, but from what I can tell, while not entirely an isolated incident, it sure does seem pretty different from gang stalking, organized or otherwise. Here’s what I’m aware of:
George Floyd, like many Blacks, has a history of being harassed by police over minor violations. I’m not aware of any stalking or secret surveillance, of Floyd, though, nor am I aware of any ongoing investigation(s) of Floyd at the time of the incident that predated the day in question.
On the day of the incident, a store clerk called police because he suspected—though he had no evidence—that Floyd had passed a counterfeit bill.
After police stopped Floyd for questioning, for no clear reason, one of the officers violently restrained Floyd and sat on top of him for quite some time, restricting his breathing. As I recall, this method of restraint actually goes against police regulations.
After some time passed with Floyd not moving or making any noise, an officer tried to find a pulse and couldn’t find one. Despite this, quite some time passed before the officer on top of Floyd finally got off of him.
None of the other officers on the scene did anything to stop, help, discourage, or encourage what that officer was doing to Floyd.
Essentially, this officer killed Floyd over a suspected counterfeit bill despite the fact that Floyd posed no real threat to the officers.
Really, while there is a lot of terrible parts of this (each of the bullet points except the last one were each individually reprehensible at best), it’s a) quite different from what you said about the Ahmed Arbery Case and b) doesn’t appear to be gang stalking at all. There’s no stalking, no involvement of the prosecutor(s) or higher-ups, no one involved besides on-duty police officers and the victim, no long-term plans (in fact, it appears that there was no plan to kill him prior to the phone call to police by the store clerk), nothing about online stuff, and no allegations or charges of child abuse or child porn.
It may be (and likely is) indicative of some serious issues with how many police treat suspects, but it’s not really indicative of any sort of conspiracy or gang stalking (organized or otherwise).
Even if it was evidence of organized gang stalking, once again, it would be purely anecdotal evidence, not empirical.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative effect
Thanks for responding, and for your willingness to educate yourself.
Start your education here below, courtesy of LiveScience, the definition of empirical evidence :
“Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation.”
Now, please correct your erroneous statements about empirical evidence above, and your flawed, and passive aggressive /deceptive, or possibly just ignorant insistence that I used the term incorrectly.
The rest of your comment has some merit, until we come to this:
“at least one of those people gang-stalking someone is being investigated”
You are arguing that beause someone, sonewhere decides to call their stalking and cyber stalking an investigation, that somehow, thats ok, right? Scientologists, rapists, neonazis, the ADL and their across the aisle compatriots in the Westboro Baptist church, or some agency (full of members of those same groups ) are all the same in your conception.
I have stated many times that these are not legal or predicated “investigations,” based in probable cause or even reasonable suspicion,with accompanying legal requirements of pursuit of a suspect according to legal guidelines.
Gang stalking is: police, and police affilliated persons targeting, and harassing individuals under the thin disguise (cover) of “investigations,” but only called that after they get caught by their peers, or caught up in a lawsuit.
These ARE NOT legally predicated according to laws of due process. And so, by your definition, a cop stalking her ex-boyfriend for a few years, counts as an “investigation.”
Black Cube stalking Rose McGowan is also an investigation, but their actions are neither legal, or ethical.
So, again, the gang stalking of Ahmaud Arbery presents yet another example, one of thoysands in a HUGE BODY OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, that labelling someone a gang member, and then targeting them outside of due process is what these cases are.
By all accounts, George Floyd had some personal isdues, but thats irrelevant, as we see once,again that ROGS Analysis is batting 1000% in that case too.
And as I noted elsewhere, I,was acquainted with several of those cops too, ling begore they murdered Floyd. That department is FULL of gang members who masquerade as police. Indeed, the head of that cities nefarious police union is a white racist biker.
Try harder, bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bhull Aspergers, and the negative ef
Empirical evidence must be recorded as data. The plural of anecdote is not data. There is a distinction made between empirical evidence and anecdotal evidence. Do you have any data, not more anecdotes, about gang-stalking?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy
Listen: I see that you are responding all over TD to stuff I wrote days ago.
So, refer to the post above in the future, because your Aspergers /autism clearly clouds and precludes,every comment you make.
On a certain level, you are quite intelligent, according to the autistic rules that work for you.
But your overall autistic affect clouds your ability to undeestand structures of dialogues that have spanned over a year, and for which you constantly ask for proof , here!, now!, to satisfy your autistic impaired ruleset
In other words, your off topic derailing fails to do its own homework, time and again, so replying to your here!, now! , autism based demands is quite similar, unironically to dealing with sociopaths and narcissistic abusers.
You ask for links incessantly, but fail to link those with other links, for example, my comments about mass shooters,and missing hard drives being a main feature of mass homicides that were precipitated by CVE program surveillance, and cyber -policings infatuation with breaking the laws about non -consensual psyops, ranging from Stephen Paddock, to Seung Hui Cho, to The Joker in Colorado, to the northern IL shooter, and many, many others.
So, I have begun to think you are not the most stable, or honest “thinker” here, as your own inner monologue is constantly in conflict with facts, and those facts, that you know nothing about, nor care to thread together (for some reason ...).
Adam Lanza, much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And your psychotic breaks with reality are spamming up this thread.
None of what you claim is even remotely verifiable and there is no evidence to prove it. So if you have it, link to it. Otherwise no one is going to even remotely take you seriously.
Evidence or it didn't happen.
Also, take an English and grammar class. Half your posts are barely decipherable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
re: None of what you claim is even remotely verifiable
Yeah you black ops types get alot of traction on the, YOU CANT PROVE IT .MEME.
but also, you cannor tprove us wrong about what you pedophiles,and i nternt dialogue subverters that you are, Opus,Dei, ADL, et
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There you go with baseless accusations again.
No, I've never said "you can't prove it". In fact I've told you outright to provide the evidence TO prove it. You have not and it's not able to be found anywhere. What is available is lots of evidence to the CONTRARY.
Dude, learn English. I could prove it but I don't particularly feel like posting that level of personal information publicly on the internet. But regardless, what does that even matter? It doesn't change the facts as we've stated them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Techdirt online mobbing, gang stalking, freudenschade
You derailing shitpost trolls make life difficult for human beings.
Are you asking that I prove what exactly?
Operation Talpion, and Technion, Squad 8200s control of Silicon Valley, and all of those startups with backdoors in electronic devices routed directly to Israeli intel?
Or that the IDF model in Palestine is the exact extortianate policing scheme that has now infected policing around the world?
Targeting? Blackmailing? Stalking, and wiretapping, as part of an organized conspiracy against individuals, and whole populations?
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/dont-single-out-homosexuality-response-israel-bla ckmail-revelations-palestinians
That Unit 8200 eavesdrops on Palestinians in order to use personal information to coerce them into collaboration with Israel?
“As one of the letter writers explained to The Guardian, “Any information that might enable extortion of an individual is considered relevant information. Whether said individual is of a certain sexual orientation, cheating on his wife, or in need of treatment in Israel or the West Bank – he is a target for blackmail.”
While such extortion – for example against Palestinians from Gaza needing to travel for life-saving medical treatment – has long been documented by human rights organizations, it has been rare for it to be acknowledged in this manner by those tasked with doing the extorting.
Understandably, this has generated a great deal of interest and outrage....”
Anyone can see that your vapid, substanceless and derailing comments are what I say they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That almost made me chuckle.
Your original claims that started all this nonsense. Have you forgotten what they are already?
I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about the actions of the American government and law enforcement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspi
I have, on multiple occasions, explicitly addressed your links. That I failed to see the evidence you see does not mean I didn’t engage with your evidence.
Let me make this clear: even taking all of the links you’ve posted together that I’ve addressed individually, they don’t support your claims.
Additionally, you clearly don’t understand autism or Asperger’s at all. It has none of the effects you’ve ascribed to it other than a tendency towards logical rather than emotional thinking, though I fail to see why you consider that a downside in this discussion.
Your attempts to ascribe my demanding of evidence, use of things like Hanlon’s Razor, Occam’s Razor, and Hitchen’s Razor, refusal to do your research for you, and supposedly clouded or limited thinking to my autism is belied by the fact that literally no one else is agreeing with you and just about everyone else has done the same thing. Do all of them have autism, too?
Also, even if (and that is a massive if) my autism was clouding my thinking, how could that possibly mean that I am being even remotely dishonest?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Co
re: literally no one else is agreeing with you
[cites facts pulled out of a pill bottle ]
Do you know each and every unique TD reader then?
Also, are you speaking just for you and the quite small clusterfuck of similarly afflicted TD tone trolls, and other highly vocal tribe of shutins and misfits here who have egregious amounts of free time to organize, stalk, and flag my posts, right alongside FOP and LEIU trolls?
I mean, your types engage in Trump/Barr conspiracy all day long, but sort of come off as police and surveillance state enablers when it comes to this topic, which makes me wonder exactly when did TD become merely controlled opposition?
Oh yeah.... (hits the insightful button on bhulls running derailment)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?
Look, I’m not stalking you. I’m following this thread. When I suddenly started responding to some of your days-old posts in other threads, it was after I took a few days off Techdirt and decided to play catch up. I do this pretty much every month or so, and it’s likely to happen more frequently while I’m working on my project. There is nothing unusual going on here.
As for the “no one else is agreeing with you” comment, I was referring to the various commenters here. See, you made a claim about the sort of discussions and community we have here at Techdirt, trying to imply that I was an outsider, partly by claiming that no one else was taking the same stance. As such, I considered it fair play to turn that around: who else reading this comment section agrees with you? You asked me first, so you can’t exactly complain if I do the same.
Regarding Trump/Barr conspiracies, I don’t recall really talking much about them, but yeah, you managed to find the one instance where I happened to not completely disagree with Barr on one specific part of an incident given the facts you provided. It’s an anomaly. I generally disagree with Barr on just about every issue, such as encryption and the seriousness of the allegations against Trump, but I suppose even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I generally analyze each case individually. I do this to try to avoid biases from getting too involved in my analyses. Hence why I can not completely disagree with Barr on one narrow issue but condemn him on just about everything else.
As for TD in general “coming off as police-state enablers when it comes to this topic” despite generally coming off the opposite way, has it occurred to you that, maybe, your definition of a “police-state enabler” might be just a bit too broad? Just a thought.
And regarding derailment, where exactly did I stray off the topic from the previous comment?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspi
Y’know, up until recently, I never understood why people would hide the fact that they have Asperger’s. It’s not debilitating or anything, and no one I’d mentioned it to ever had a problem with it.
I’ve never met an asshole like you who believes that having autism automatically disqualifies anything that that person might have to say. Your ignorant bigotry is astonishing. I can see why some would rather keep it private, even if I personally still take great pride in saying that, yes, I have autism!
At first I was mad, but now I think I just feel sorry for you and your narrow-minded way of viewing people who think differently from you.
Also, regarding responding to comments from a few days ago, I had taken a break from Techdirt for a few days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ochams Razor [sic ]
bhull, I thought you might like to see this, from todays news:
The head of PsyOps and torture at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Dr. James Mitchell -a Mormon - admits he threatens detainees with “slicing their childrens throats. ”
https://m.newser.com/story/286209/cia-psychologist-i-will-cut-your-sons-throat.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ochams Razor [sic ]
Interesting, disturbing, horrifying, yet sadly plausible. Now, not to defend any of this, but I don’t really think Dr. Mitchell’s religion is a pertinent detail. Also, he really should have his medical license revoked as this is highly unethical. It’s also stupid and ineffective at acquiring accurate information, so it’s also completely pointless for him to do.
Now, just for the record here, but I’m just pointing out that this isn’t really relevant to anything here, and it doesn’t exactly prove anything all of us didn’t already know. Still, thanks for sharing, I guess.
This is one of the many reasons why Gitmo should’ve been shut down years ago, but Congress just had to keep stonewalling Obama from transferring the prisoners so that he could shut it down, and Obama just couldn’t free or prosecute them all (though, in his defense on this part, the previous administration didn’t make things easy by keeping the necessary records to sort the plausible cases from the unlikely ones, and prosecuting all of them at once would be a logistical nightmare). And Trump certainly won’t do anything about any of this.
Incidentally, I’m not sure what this “Ochams Razor [sic]” you keep throwing around has anything to do with this. I know that the term is you referencing something some Jewish person ostensibly said in an email (which I am not going to argue about if only because whether that email is in fact as you represent it doesn’t make a massive difference in the grand scheme of things). I just don’t understand its applicability in this particular case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: um, wut? NSA is SPYING?! Conspiracy theory!
Yeah, ECHELON. the remnants of which are that cancerous growth in New Zealand.
But also, Carnivore. You knew the dogs were at your heels because the net would slow down to Atari pong levels.
And, Carnivore at least, was only accompanied by blatant attempts by actual agents into obvious manufactured charges, like,“dude, can.you hold this bomb for just a minute, while I go call the fuzz?”
Whereas these days, full capture-Utah, accompanied by incitement from Georgia, after radicalization via,Thai black site is hosted by JTRIG on Twitter, using Amazon S3, and Facebook persistence as they mirror your phone in Virginia....
Oooops.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Agency type troll is agency type troll. I on the other hand, am a real person. You can even Dox me if you want to.
I am known for:
my historic defense of first amendment demonstrative speech, for all citizens
criticism if the bizarre, illegal /unethical, ponerology based pseudo science of CVE profiling and programs online (Moonshot CVE, PRISM, XKEYSCORE ) that target people and redirect their intentions without informed consent
police corruption criticism
criticism of specific named NGOs that enable police corruption, and who participate in gang stalking, and slander online and off, like Britains JTRIG
criticism of pairs of AC chatbots that follow my posts across the internet, like proselytizing Mormons (I might add that CVE programs utilize that exact good cop /bad cop approach online too )
“Attorney General William Barr said Monday. Many of the 21 cadets had contact with child pornography and possessed jihadist or anti-American material, Barr said.”
WTF is had contact with exactly?*
Care to comment on that, AC?
https://m.newser.com/story/285576/us-boots-21-saudi-cadets-after-pensacola-rampage.html
One after another mass shooter, missing hard drives, webscrubbing their Facebook /Twitter accounts, and the regularly occuring child porn smear in nearly every case, just as the FBI /DIA/private contractor unspecified tries to recover their porn stash.
The Pensacola shooter was mocked in publuc, at his workplace, by a guy who sexually harrassed him, by calling him #porn stash, AC.
Gee, you think the fearless USG would open a prosecution of dangerous, child porn using jihadis wouldnt you? Unless....
Unless of course, the USAF /NCIS/JTRIG /CIA child porn distribution in compromise operations directed at foreign nationals, and others who are cyberstalked by the MIC online and off is like, a thing, AC.
Care to elaborate for the civilians, AC?
We can start here, with JTRIG derailing online, but they arent the only agency doing it, not by a long shot at your forehead even :
https://www.schneier.com/gchq-catalog/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Stop copy/paste spamming. You've proven you have no clue what you're talking about and nobody is even remotely likely to listen to you at this point. Pasting the same thing over and over again just makes you look even worse (if that's even possible).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Aspergers Rules
As long as weaponized chatbots like you and other tone trolls, derailers, and assorted flamebaiters and cowards continue to do what you do here, enjoy my posts.
Otherwise, stop this charade of being a community flagged forum.
Operation Glowing Symphony
psychological operations with a high-tech twist are being used against western citizens, activists, and dissenters
https://www.lawfareblog.com/integration-psychological-operations-cyber-operations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Aspergers Rules
Again, Asperger’s has nothing to do with this. 🙄
Seriously, any forum would flag your posts for being copy/pasted so blatantly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Aspergers Rules
.....in your specific case, you cannot find evidence or my claims, even when I post major media links to it, and describe it exactly as I do.
Worse, you cannot even articulate my alleged claims not once, ever.
bhull /Aspergers case study, can you even state my claim/s?
But just above this post, I provided a link to Scientologists who worked in a highly organized way to stalk a dissenter from a whackadoodle religion, and this was caught on film, and documented in major media outlets.
And this, after I have posted other evidence for months, years even, where even cops /reporters /others s call it gang stalking, most notoriously Lt. Larry Richards in Santa Cruz, and the case of Rick and Cindy Krlich in OHIO, or Bob Deis, who was gang stalked by the Stockton PD, by the police and fire unions and all of it documented in MSM.
So, please, tell me more about what I just need to know about ASD spectrum disorders, and how you are too mentally challenged to even see the connection between YOUR disorder, and what a cockblock it is talking to you, whoever you are, chatbot or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Aspergers Rules
Uh, actually, no, you posted one case: the Scientology one. The other links I specifically addressed in other posts, describing how it didn’t appear to me to include evidence to support your claim of organized gang stalking as opposed to other explanations (which varied from regular gang stalking to misogyny to being a terrorist to standard screening). Maybe the reason why I don’t see what you see is because I’m aware of cognitive biases and try to avoid them, like the one where you see patterns that aren’t really there, as well as confirmation bias (in the case of Barr deporting Saudis from a US military base). Maybe I require a higher standard of proof. Maybe you know something I don’t. Any of those explanations are possible and plausible, and none of them are characteristics of autism.
As I understand the gist of some of your claims (which are many), to summarize, you believe that organizations—including the ADL, US government agencies, and GCHQ—are infiltrating forums in order to engage in psychological warfare—including but not limited to smearing, harassment, cyberstalking, and derailing—against targeted groups and individuals, including Muslims. You also believe that organizations have done something similar in order to manufacture terrorists among certain people, including Muslims and incels. Some of the involved organizations behind all this are alleged to be working together in some manner, but not necessarily all. You claim to be an investigative journalist and activist who is trying to stand up for the victims of this, which you refer to as “organized gang stalking”, and spread the word about the dangers of this OGS. You also claim that you have been a victim of cyberstalking and harassment due to your work to expose those responsible for OGS.
Well? How’d I do? I’m sure I missed a few things, but I think I covered the big things here. And for the record, I’ve done this before, too, and you never contradicted my characterization, so if I’m wrong, you really should have pointed it out earlier.
Regarding ASD, I believe that I’m going to borrow a page from your playbook and just point out that I’ve already explained it to you multiple times. I may link to it later, but for now let’s just say stop bringing up my Asperger’s until you actually educate yourself about it. It has no relevance to this discussion at all, and it never should have come up in the first place.
(In fact, for all that you accuse me of stalking you, it sure feels like you’re the one stalking me considering the fact that you decided to look up so much info on me and decided to do an amateur diagnosis of me.)
And just so you know, in many ways I am actually fairly atypical among people with Asperger’s; for example, I have trained myself to be able to make eye contact. So if you’re planning on turning me into some sort of ASD case study, you picked a pretty bad subject. Though unless you’re also some sort of professional psychologist or something in addition to being an investigative journalist and activist, you really have no business doing any sort of case study into any mental disorder; if you are, then I’m pretty sure you violated ethics rules when you first said I had Asperger’s.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I guess we are going to be here a long time then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: is that you?
Wow, just my luck!
I have found Stephen P. Stone, bhull 242, and few other lo.g term NAMBLA subscribers here, all in one thread, trying to escape paying their NAMBLA membership dues!
Mr. Hull, Mr. Stone, et al: are you all still at the same half -way house address, or have you fled that state?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: re:
If all you have are insults, I pity you.
Evidence or it didn't happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: re:
They aren’t even good insults.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: online psyops
Did your head fall off yet?
“Operation Glowing Symphony was intended to degrade and disrupt online....efforts for propaganda, communications, fundraising and recruitment. According to NPR, much of this effort focused on creating an endless series of technology annoyances and time-wasting interruptions that degraded and disrupted the workflow of.... network operators significantly. The NPR report referred to these activities as
“psychological operations with a high-tech twist” because they were *intended to cause high levels of emotional frustration in [those targeted with PsyOps ] and presumably to degrade their operational effectiveness as a result.”
https://www.lawfareblog.com/integration-psychological-operations-cyber-operations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why would my head fall off? And what does that link/quote have to do with anything?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: re:
Anything to say on substance? PUNTing your head now.
Whats your take on military psyops targeting civilians in western nations, AC?
I think the civilians deserve to know who you are, and what your types enable.
But stop kidding yourself that your shitball comments and flag brigades are somehow enabling the marketplace of ideas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: re:
You got thoroughly owned with actual facts and are now resorting to insults because you have nothing else to come back with and refuse to accept reality and the fact that you are wrong.
How's that for substance?
Thanks for making my point for me.
What does it matter?
The Constitution of the United States and multiple other laws protecting individual privacy say otherwise.
What am I enabling?
Oh, I never said my comments were enabling the marketplace of ideas. That's done by the fact that the internet is open to anyone to post pretty much anything they want, as evidenced by the fact that your comments are even allowed in the first place. I'm just pointing out your insanity by also making use of the free marketplace of ideas, same as you.
As for flag brigades, I flag any post that is either trolling or blatantly divorced from reality. But I'm only one internet rando. You'll have to address your brigade comments to the rest of the people who also don't have a high opinion of your comments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: substance abuse
AC, see what happens when you dip into your own Big Pharma drug supply?
You ACs spawn like tadpoles in slime, while never addressing the topic at hand.
How much does that pharmaceutical company pay you for the garbage you post?
Big Pharma meta-narrative: its,whats for breakfast! (and lunch, and dinner)®
Yeah, Rando, sure. Now go take your meds, you Sparkling Sand Baby.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Still only got insults I see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: substance abuse
AC, see what happens when you dip into your own Big Pharma drug supply?
You ACs spawn like tadpoles in slime, while never addressing the topic at hand.
How much does that pharmaceutical company pay you for the garbage you post?
Big Pharma meta-narrative: its,whats for breakfast! (and lunch, and dinner)®
Yeah, Rando, sure. Now go take your meds, you Sparkling Sand Baby.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pity is the fruit of Uranus
Pity is a benign form of abuse
I don't want people to feel sorry for me, I want them to realize how strong I am.
http://www.searchquotes.com/quotes/about/Pity/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
That was probably meant to sound deep, but it doesn’t. For what it’s worth, I feel compassion for victims of gang stalking. I pity you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
Thanks, bhull/Aspergers Awareness, I know your deep empathyand compassion knows know bounds, as you have demon strated over the last few weeks culminating in your concessions that:
gang stalking is real, and you participate in it
your acknowledgement that I profiled you with accuracy, and diagnosed you with psychological accuracy (and several others here too) based upon speech patterns, and other patterned behaviors online
[cue the,sound of lemmingssquealing at the sight of a cliffs edge]
(cmon, we both know that you Aspies are incapable of either empathy or sympathy. Like psychopaths, autistics have an inborn affective disorder which precludes either, though, as we know, psychology is pure junk science with applied labelling theory backing it)
But thanks for taking the cue I gave you from that other thread in re: compassion, and running with it here. In cyberspace, even deviants and artists can appear normal, right?
I too, feel deeply for your inborn inability to grasp nuance, and your tendency to be a follower, not a leader.
I heard once that Hitler depended on that, and his version of DVIC 1.0 to Make Germany Great Again ( and it worked, sort of, right? Or...?) and Stalin too.
So, I dont pity you I acknowlege your struggle, and all of its good, bad, and even your very ugly deficit, ok?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Again with the insults.
Evidence or GTFO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
What evidence are you asking for, racist AC chatbot?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Anything that you can link to that is reliable, independently verifiable, and strongly supports your claims. To date you have provided none.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think he meant, “Evidence for what?” As in, “Which claims are you asking about,”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
At this point I'll take anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your a liar and likely a chatbot, because you only lead with discredit /derail, snd never engage with evidence.
PLEASE go get a glass of water, and spill it on your keyboard as you reply next time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[Citation needed.]
I've refrained from addressing this previously but what the hell: chat bots can't respond this in depth and follow conversation threads this accurately. Sorry, the tech just isn't there yet.
[Citation needed.]
Because you haven't provided any for me to engage with. Any links you've provided are either sketchy or don't really support your claims.
So you want my replies to sink to the level of yours? Sorry, I'll pass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
While I do agree that gang stalking is real (something I thought I’d mentioned a while before you acknowledged it), I never said that I have ever participated in gang stalking. Where did you get that idea?
You did correctly observe that I have autism; however, I have noted that your diagnoses and profiling have been wrong in a number of areas. That you accurately diagnosed my autism is actually an anomaly. You’ve made a lot more claims about me that were flat out wrong. Also, you’ve shown such great ignorance about autism and Asperger’s that I’m starting to suspect that you didn’t figure it out from my speech patterns but from me explicitly saying so online on other sites! (Yeah. There’s a reason I’ve said that my autism is no great secret; I’ve spoken about it online several times.)
So yeah, saying that you “profiled [me] with accuracy” is overselling it.
I do occasionally attempt to use snark or humor to varying degrees of success, but that’s something that started long before I ever came to this site. I tend to use snark and humor in my everyday life, too, and have done so for much of my life. It’s not a result of me trying to fit in; that’s actually not something people with autism tend to do, really. And it really has nothing to do with anything, anyway.
My sense of humor, while no less than most people’s, can be a little… off compared to many neurotypical people. But then, in my observation, there isn’t much strong consensus among neurotypical people about what is and isn’t funny in a lot of cases, so that doesn’t really bother me that much. I’m not a comedian, so if some of my jokes fall flat, then so be it. It’s not like people have found your jokes funny, either.
Though, I should probably point out that this is one of the areas I differ greatly with other autistic people: I can actually understand jokes, sarcasm, idioms, metaphors, and plays on words pretty well, especially compared to the vast majority of autistic people. I also really enjoy using them myself. In this way, I am quite the anomaly, so I suppose your confusion over why I’d make attempts at snark and humor here is understandable. I still take things literally more often than neurotypical people, but you’d be surprised at how well I often do at detecting things like that (though, admittedly, it’s a lot harder to do via text and with people I don’t know, especially online).
Now see, that is perhaps the number one myth about Asperger’s and autism: lack of empathy and sympathy. Quite frankly, that is completely and utterly false. We have trouble interpreting nonverbal cues and in expressing ourselves, and under certain circumstances empathy can be a little difficult. We also lack awareness of our surroundings and of social norms and social cues. To say that we lack the ability to feel sympathy or empathy at all is just plain untrue. At most, it develops more slowly, and even that’s an oversimplification. A lot of it is simply lack of awareness of factors that trigger empathy, and the fact that we think very differently from neurotypical people.
With enough training, an autistic person can develop pretty decent empathy and sympathy.
There’s also the fact that we have difficulty expressing ourselves, especially our emotions; we actually have difficulty understanding our own emotions at first. So even when we feel empathy, we often don’t realize or know what to do with the feelings we’re picking up. So to others, we appear to be cold, unfeeling, and incapable of empathy and sympathy. That’s just not true, however. For us, it’s like we’re playing that game where you try and feel around in a box to figure out what was hidden inside without looking; we experience the sensations, but we don’t know how to handle them.
By the way, a little interesting factoid: there’s this theory that the reason people with autism have difficulty with making eye contact is that we actually receive so much information from the eyes—which are involved a lot in nonverbal communication and reading people’s emotions—that we are unable to handle it all and so we have to look away. Since we find it physically painful to do so, this does make sense, and it explains a lot of other things to. Many autistic people find socializing overwhelming because of how many complications are involved and so many factors to keep track of. We also often have an oversensitivity to light and sound. We spend a lot of time focusing on details, often observing things most people would miss. This oversensitivity and being overwhelmed by stimuli actually explains a lot about autism. And this may even play a role in our… lower social emotional intelligence: since we avoid making eye contact growing up, we miss a lot of the things that we’d learn by watching others, and eye contact can teach you a lot about emotions and social cues. It’s quite fascinating.
This may explain some things, like your severe misunderstandings about what autism and Asperger’s actually are, but it also brings up a number of questions:
Why did you use psychological profiling to identify my autism and suggest I should seek treatment for it if you think psychology is junk science? Why do you blame so much of my behavior on my autism? Why do you dismiss so much of what I say with, “You have autism, so you can’t possibly have anything useful to contribute to this discussion”? Why do you keep referring to me as an “ASD case study” and such? Why do you presume to know so much about autism? Why do you keep bringing up autism at all? What is your explanation for your supposedly being able to identify that I have autism based upon speech patterns and other unspecified behavioral patterns online?
See, this is kinda making my suspicions that you just read somewhere where I said that I have autism rather than doing some analysis of my patterns of speech and behavior online seem more likely.
Thanks for noticing. For what it’s worth, I didn’t entirely mean it when I said that I pity you (well, I kinda do, but also kinda not, but whatever). I was just making a little joke to build off of the previous comments in this thread.
That said, I do genuinely feel a sense of compassion for those who are victims of gang stalking. It was just the statement about pity that was a joke.
I… guess…? I mean, to be honest, my POV is a bit skewed on what’s “normal”, anyway, and I’m not really a huge fan of the concept. (What is “normal”? Why do people care so much about being or being perceived as “normal”?) I generally analyze what’s “normal” on a community-by-community basis and on a person-by-person basis. So in an online community full of artists and so-called “deviants”, yes, artists and deviants can appear normal.
Another thing is that in cyberspace, people seem a lot more free to act outside of what is considered “normal” than they do in real life. So in that sense, normality online is different from normality offline.
I’m not sure what your point is, though. Are you trying to imply that my sense of normality is skewed because I have a deviantArt account and perceive that as “normal”? Well, that’s not entirely true. It is normal for deviantArt, and I don’t feel ashamed about it, but I don’t really care about being “normal”, honestly. I don’t really care that much about what “normal” is. I analyze what is “normal” in different communities because that helps identify what is considered acceptable in that community (which is a lot broader), but it doesn’t actually bother me if I appear abnormal.
Actually, I understand nuance rather well. You just seem unable to understand what “nuance” actually means.
Also, for the record, simply telling someone to “keep nuance in mind” when reading something isn’t all that helpful, especially if that person actually doesn’t understand nuance. It’s better to explain the contrast between the nuanced and un-nuanced interpretations/opinions.
I can see why you’d think that, but it’s a bit oversimplified. See, because I am fully aware that my social awareness is lacking compared to most people, I tend to rely on others to determine boundaries of what is or isn’t acceptable. I also like to have some structure in place before taking action.
That said, once a structure is in place, I often tend to act independently or, when doing group work on a project or something, I wind up either leading or co-leading the project.
Maybe I’m not a political or social leader, but I do lead when I understand the parameters and feel reasonably well-versed in what needs to be done and how it can be accomplished, as well as feeling like I have some personal expertise or experience that would be useful.
Well, Godwin strikes again.
Now, for what it’s worth, I actually have very strong opinions about the overreach, invasion of privacy, breach of trust, and abuse of power that our government (and others) do all the time. However, there are several factors in why I’m not an activist, journalist, or politician, including:
My ability to do something about it is fairly limited, especially while in college and seeking employment.
I’m rather introverted, especially offline, so my character isn’t exactly suited to talking to people in real life, attending protests, etc.
My political expertise and social awareness are also limited, so even if I could do something, I don’t think I’d be the best at finding and enacting solutions to such massive problems on such a large scale.
What I can do and do reasonably well right now is voting, having awareness and thinking critically, and speaking out online, which are things I’m already doing.
Basically, I’m aware of my limitations, and I’m already doing what I feel I can do about these issues. I’m sorry if you feel that is enabling wrongdoers, but honestly, my powers and expertise are limited.
Well thanks. That’s very kind of—
Oh.
Well, that kinda ruined it.
To be honest, I don’t consider it a deficit at all. I just have a different point of view and some different abilities. Sure, that presents its own problems, and it can be a struggle (though it’s not the biggest thing I’ve struggled with), but I don’t consider myself lacking, exactly. There’s nothing “very ugly” about it at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
TL;DR, but I will get back to you later.
But I did in fact diagnose Aspergers/autism, exactly as I said (and for all I know, you are a brilliant troll, feigning autism)and I did not read your online presence that closely, or find that info online.
I read what you said, and noted your affect just enough to get into your head a bit, and demonstrate a few points, in order to make a broader point about how CVE targets people who can be easily profiled, THEN bullied provoked, and labeled, which creates legal predicate for neverending pseudo-investigation, and then possibly, eventually radicalized after some shitbag DHS/Mi5/CVEtc. private contractor gets in their head, and does typical CVE bullying, which then actually comes offline after these PsyOps.
online profiling is JUNK SCIENCE, with mixed with religion based ponerological analysis, bullying, and bias, which is seldom discussed in MSM; with the,intended consequence of profilung, terrorizing, and harassing targeted persons until they do something stupid
online CVE programs are based in JUNK SCIENCE, that masks the due process violating tactics that unethical, non-consensual weaponized investigations are, and the abusive, and unregulated use of psyops by agencies, institutions, and private contractors online (and yes, Israeli trolls and the ADL working with dominionist christian zionists online and offline are the absolute worst, most vile offenders by EVERY standard of civillity)
I did all that profiling and of you, augmented by dimpke,SOCMINT, because, reasons. But mostly, to prove a point to you, and anyone who will listen/read here, about any one persons vulnerability to these slick, non-consensual, provably destructive military operations directed at civilians.
What I did here, was what I have observed THEM doing to others and myself, and what other sources have repirted being done to them, going back to the days when the term astroturfing was coined.
In its most benign form, these psyops rattle a few online commenters, and get the hateboner crowd suiting up in their always randy, ever handy Nazi Papa Underwear®.
But in CVE form, directed at unsuspecting targets of zionist/dominionist/racist psyops, it acts as a form of psychic driving, disruption, and depatterning, by design,and according to official sources, and it is literally as close to mind control as one can get without physical torture.
While Techdirt frequently covers technology that hacks/exploits/etc., they seldom touch on PsyOps, directed at the American public, which utilizes technology to form situations of interrogation, redirection, and non-consensual operations that affect the mind, and its processes, causing actual biological results.
And you correctly state that I am wrong on many points, because no one is properly defined by the arbitrary, sectarian, capricious, and frequently meta-tribal pseudo-science of psychology. And, as,stated neither you, nor I even know if you, or I are actually human; and if human, you dont know that I am the actual person.or a clever psyop baded in profiles, and manipulating you, andvyour perception of me.
And thats why online profiling falls flat, and should stand against strict scrutiny and oversight as a practice. It literally is non-consensual experimentation on human subjects.
In fact, what it is more than.anything, is ritual defamation in practice, followed frequently by offline activities that make Hitler, J.Edgar Hoover, and Stalin giggle and squeal like pigs on a barbeque pit in hell, which is an entirely seperate novel.
[the irony of course, is that in CVE programs, the War on Thoughts; Bizzaro world, or the ass end if a wormhole, upside down on a barbecue in hell is actually a good thing for pigs because its all inverse reality]
I just want to note, that you are putting volumes of personal info online right now, in this thread, and that can be dangerous in ways you might not even be able to imagine, and I,suggest you dontvdo that; whereas 99% of what I put out there is...well, reasons, for thosecwho know what I am doing.
I generally mislead, or directly dodge putting anything actually personal online, for safety of myself, and others.
As I state repeatedly, I am not concerned about Russian trollfarmers, or the Chinese, because what the US and our so-called allies are doing online to our own citizens is criminal, and undemocratic.
In fact, its anti-democratic in all its forms, and it only leads to unjust, anti-constitutional theocractic rule, generation after generation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
I… think I understand what you’re trying to do.
Unless I’m mistaken—so please correct me if I’m wrong—it appears that you are essentially using the tools that you believe (think, know, whatever) are being used in these CVE programs, specifically online profiling—which you think is junk science—as well as insults, flamebaiting, trolling, and similar tactics in order to prove that we are vulnerable to these tactics should one of these alphabet agencies (as you call them) turn their attention towards us and to draw attention to the danger and immorality that these tactics and those who make use of them present.
As part of that, you used this “online profiling” to (correctly) diagnose my autism based on my speech and behavior, and once that was done, you used that as a potential weakpoint for you to take advantage of through several means, including (but not limited to) intentionally making incorrect assumptions about me based on stuff that you don’t necessarily believe is true about autism and dismissing me as unimportant due to my autism. Essentially, you don’t necessarily actually believe all the junk you said about me or my autism; you were just trying to make a point about how a malicious actor might use that to attack me.
Am I right so far? I know there’s a lot more to what you said, but am I on the right track? I’d like to know before I try to dissect the rest of that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
Exactly, more or less, based upon evidence, experience, and sources who have reported these things.
For example, the template of US cyber, targeting ISIS outlined in the article below. Note the psyops and social engineering exploit components:
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/763545811/how-the-u-s-hacked-isis
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
Well, IMO, I really don’t think that was a very good idea. It just makes it harder to tell when you’re being serious or not. Maybe that’s kind of the point, but you’ve essentially become both sides of Poe’s Law (the troll and the genuine article), which makes your message get kinda garbled. It really doesn’t help that this… let’s just call it “pseudo-trolling”…is often mixed in with what I believe are your genuine opinions, beliefs, and message (based on what you’ve just said) without any indication of when you switch between the two. Again, that may be part of your goal (pointing out how difficult it is to distinguish between the genuine and the troll), but it means that I still can’t quite tell that you’re not still trolling me. It also seems like you’re giving up the moral high ground in the process, and you’re alienating a lot of your audience; most people will just assume you’re a toxic troll all of the time rather than for demonstrative purposes. As a result, I’m not sure that your goals will be well served through this method.
That’s just my opinion, though, based upon my point of view and my understanding of this whole saga. You may very reasonably feel differently. So, whatever. Do as you will. You have given me something to think on, though what I come up with is likely to be applicable to gang stalking in general rather than deciding that much of it is done by an organization. That can change later, but right now, you’ve given me so much to consider that adding conspiracies (again, not necessarily in the “crazy conspiracy theory with no evidence or logic behind it” kind of way but rather the “secret or hidden collaboration to achieve some (often insidious) goal(s) through morally dubious means” sense of the term) in to further complicate matters.
For the record, this is one of several reasons why we have Occam’s Razor: it allows us to focus on the simpler parts and not have to deal with apparently needless complications. (There are other reasons, of course, but I see no need to address them here and now.)
I believe I have like a 90% or higher understanding of the conspiracy you’re alleging, and there are some parts I agree are true, some parts that I believe are likely to be true or are relatively plausible, some parts that I am simply unconvinced are true and would need more evidence, and some parts that I am convinced aren’t true (or are at least exaggerated) based on the evidence provided. However, there is a lot to unpack, and addressing any conspiracy—no matter how plausible or accurate—tends to get very complicated, and given the other aspects of what you’ve said or demonstrated are already complicated enough, and given my more introverted disposition that doesn’t really lean towards activism, I think that you’d probably prefer it if I do what I can to guard against future gang stalking—organized or otherwise—than to focus on discussing the specific allegations while also leaving myself vulnerable.
Since I do have autism, I have to do a lot more work to understand things like etiquette, “reading the room”, determining intent, distinguishing between trolls and non-trolls, etc., so it may take some time for me to wrap my head around this part. Please understand.
I’ll likely come back to address some specific arguments, but I think I’ll take a break from this for now. We’ll see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
Oh yeah, and sorry for the long post. It was originally going to be much shorter, and I probably should’ve divided it into smaller posts, but I didn’t realize how long it was until it was too late for me to easily split it up.
And it seems a good chunk of it may be superfluous if I’m right and you don’t actually believe what you’ve said about Asperger’s and autism (like that it means I can’t actually feel empathy or sympathy).
At any rate, I may post a few summaries of each individual point for easier reading if it’s necessary, so don’t worry too much about reading the whole thing. It is rather unwieldy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pity is the fruit of Uranus
Yeah, these kind of conversations dont belong here, because they do become spammy on some level.
Also because they arent one liner partisan quips that throw distracting racisticisticidiclysm!* into every AC post.
You might also take a look at a “social media expert” from a shady intel firm that ran honeypot, and child porn entrapment schemes too, and examine the vlise working relationships between these intel girms, and FVEYs agencies too:
“The Israeli social media expert, allegedly linked to the Trump campaign through an online manipulation campaign, founded several companies, including one offering 'honey traps' and 'deep web' capabilities”
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-who-is-joel-zamel-australian-israeli-li nked-to-mueller-s-trump-probe-1.6104963
These filthy pigskin black glive wearing shitstains work hand in hand with US/FVEYs Intel, all of whom are well aware of their criminal behavior, but doesnt prosecute because the value of one manufactured terrorist outweighs the value of prosecuting ten of the FVEYs affilliated bullies and harassers that created that terrorist in the first place.
Unfortunately, selective prosecution of these crackpot religious fanatics is partisan, and not as valuable as one manufactured terrorist (the crazed bomber Irv Rubin, for example worked hand in pig skinned glove with the ADL and the FBI, until Bush 2 tossed him in jail out of political convenience) .
TD wont cover these stories fairly, cuz, Chicken Little and Queen Esther made a red haired Golem that cockblocks these discussions online, via flag brigades claiming anti-shemitititisisticyclicysms, spewed by people from SITE intelligence group and other racist scumbags who have agencies, and intels ear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh put a sock in it, you moron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
yup.
Now that a verified Russian troll(you )., via,AC comments is here, let me ask you: is Moscow really favorable to Bulgakov now, or is that just more Russian troll farm spam, like you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How have you verified he is a Russian troll? Did he admit to it somewhere?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, actually:
noun, plural
sympathetic or kindly sorrow evoked by the suffering, distress, or misfortune of another, often leading one to give relief or aid or to show mercy
Too late.
The only strength we see in you is how strongly you cling to your delusions, which leads us to feel sorry for you even more.
Nice quote. So what exactly is your pain then? The pain of living in denial of the truth and having to hide under a rock to avoid it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:ACs stalkers,and the delusion smear online
Well, your kind of a pain in any ass you pike your head into, like an internet stalker/cyber-rapist-in-waiting.
(AC grabs speltchekr“spike? head?! CYBERRAPER?!WTF)
And, maybe have a look at how Big Pharma drug dealers and trolls online are deploying psyops via psychiatric meta-narrative via the smear of delusion in order to sell dope [.pdf warning]:
http://www.surveillanceissues.com/docs/the-psychiatric-metanarrative-a-response-to-the-new -york-times.pdf
Thats,written by a psychologist who was endorsed by Dr. Thomas Szaczs. While I challenge religionists, I equally appreciate their struggle against ultra-right infiltration of psychological narrative framing.
Now, re: only strength we see in you is how strongly you cling to your delusions
Well, win one for Vincent!
But I still havent seen a bulldogs whisker of hope that you are any more viable than a jellyfish bone.
So, yeah, that lump of fetid, classic discrediting delusion cheese that just fell from your gooey fingertips onto your keyboard could have fallen right out of gang stalking denialist Drs. Lorraine Sheridan/Tomo Shibatas/David V. James/ or Liz Dietrichs vagina or mouth, one undifferentiated from the other, as impossibly as it would be to differentiate your own delusion of delusions from delusions.
In you case, grandeur, augmented with passive aggressive sadism, and insecurities about being one person, instead of one of we, whoever they/them/us are
You cling to a thread of hope that others somehow agree with you, as the two of you Sally forth like tone trolling Mormons, online.
So lets revisit your type of anonymous coward that is easily misled online, orcso eadily partucipates in.or foments online mobbing(without revealing who I think you two are here as only bhull242 consistently clings to the delusional use of the we pronoun, and two others too)
[Aspie alert on two, two, too]
Your cybertype is influenced by, or complicit with this:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/integration-psychological-operations-cyber-operations
And, you ACs arent worth the time, because you are in fact vain cowards, whereas some here know my actual name.
But I empathize with your isolation. Stay there for awhile, you deserve it.
Myself, I wake up today surrounded with loving family and associates, none of whom are AC tone trolls, or online morons, or psyops derailers.
And, yeah, cool quotes, huh?
Theyre not mine, but I put them there for posterity, to give the victims of these cyber-operations a glimmer of hope, after they figure out what types of total shitbags have bullied and harrassed them, after they have been abused online, and decide to start Googling for links.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:ACs stalkers,and the delusion smear online
I’ll only address the part where you specifically mention me, at least for now.
Now, first of all, I kinda like that “two others too” bit. It has a nice cadence to it.
Now, here’s the thing. Generally, when members of the Techdirt community such as me use “we” or “us”, we mean “me and many others commenting on Techdirt. In such a case, what’s usually happening is one of the following:
Having been a recognized member of the Techdirt community for some time and having been recognized by the community as having insight on certain issues, some of us, as individuals, believe we have some knowledge about what is generally accepted by the majority of people who comment on Techdirt by recognizing certain patterns, and so we may feel qualified to speak on behalf of others in some cases, particularly those whose opinions on certain subjects are well known.
Having observed a particular thread and how it’s going, we may feel that we understand what the general consensus is among those who have commented on that particular thread, and thus we may feel qualified to speak as part of that consensus.
This is extremely common, especially within relatively small online communities or when someone is part of a clear majority opinion. I’ve observed it loads of times. I honestly don’t know why you think that’s unusual or “delusional”. And it’s actually used by a lot more than myself and two others on this site alone, even excluding ACs.
Additionally, I have occasionally used “we” or “us” when talking about autistic persons because I’m talking about the shared or common characteristics of a specific group of people of which I am one. I hope I don’t need to explain that any further.
Honestly, I don’t understand why you are so hung up on this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I see I've struck a nerve. In the immortal words of Grumpy Cat: "Good!".
WTF indeed.
....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Who?
What?
Have you Michael'ed down your Vincents?
And by viable you mean what, exactly? If you mean a viable human being, well, I'm not dead so by default that makes me a viable human being.
Who?
Um, people by definition do not exist as multiples, only individuals. Therefore, I am ONE person. Unless you've somehow figured out how to occupy the same space/time as someone else and merge their consciousness.
Um, they do. A great deal of them. And not just on TD but all over the web.
That really describes you more than me, just saying.
If by mislead you mean only believes claims with hard facts and evidence to back them up, then yeah, I guess you are correct.
What the hell kind of language is that?
I have never advocated for more people to reply to anyone, nor have I advocated for them to "mob" anyone.
I really have no idea what you're trying to say here. Try learning better English and being more specific in your claims.
Again with the insults that you don't even understand.
Keep dreaming.
First, if we aren't worth your time, why the hell do you keep responding to us? Just shut up and go away already. You apparently don't want to be here and we don't want you to spam the comments with your drivel and delusions. You never commenting again is a win win for both of us.
Second, not knowing someones name is not cowardice, it's called reality. There are billions of people in the world, most of whom don't know each other. It's literally impossible to meet and know every person's name in the world. Suggesting that is just insane. For reference, I don't know ANYONE'S real name who comments here regularly, and they don't know mine.
Anonymity is not isolation.
Hey man, we all have friends and family, but it would drive me nuts if they all slept in the same room with me every night and woke up every day with dozens of people in my bedroom, but to each their own I guess.
So?
Yeah, now if only you understood it.
Dude, if you think our replies to you are bullying, harassment, or some kind of "government psyops", I have no idea how you will survive the real world. Most of the replies to you have been generally civil. You are the one who has been slinging insults. For an online community, that's showing a hell of a lot of restraint. The majority of people who are confronted with your type of incivility would waste no time in hurling it right back at you.
Again, evidence or it didn't happen. Your entire post is a whole lot of insult with only one link to a sketchy blog site that doesn't really support your position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawfare is “just some blog” AC?
Your turn, you lying, time wasting sociopathic psycho-sadist piece of garbage dipshit
Proof or GTFO: who are you to claim anyone, anywhere listens to you?
(Joe? Aaron? MIT rabbi-guy? You guys are carbon copy dipshits).
You are no one, to anyone, without a name, AC shitbag.
And no, I am not intentionally crediting Brookings Institutes Lawfare blog, because NPR covered that generic reveal of how cyber works first, last September or something.
And that, decades after people targeted by these shit CVE programs became vocal about it and wrote about it online as targeted individuals.
Yeah, this half-baked, sanitized reveal of how cyber works:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/integration-psychological-operations-cyber-operations
For all anyone knows, AC, you are the EXACT agency/NGO/think tank troll that I discuss all over my posts about online bullies and harassers.
So, in re, your delusions of grandeur (maybe go chomp a cigar) to whit your imaginary consensus that people like you, or agree with you on anything, ever. “Um, they do. A great deal of them. And not just on TD but all over the web”
all of your alleged fans, all over the whole internet, just adore AC shitposters? Now thats a delusion right there Jethro.We call you cowards* for a reason.
You and other vile cowardly ACs (none of whom can by definition prove they are part of the, “Techdirt community” in any sense of proof), have followed studiously behind any post I ever made here, and flagging, harranguing me and the post, with flame baiting racial epithets, and ad hominems, and hiding posts that were critical of or informative in regards to:
*DoD black programs, and due process free, non-consensual influence ops (aka psyops)online
the Alphabet soups child porn distribution habits
police brutality (and your whiteness condoning it too)
TDs establishment bent, and NGO/trollfarm biaded flaghing protocol
the racist ADL flying US police to the Gaza strip to to teach them about othering via Buberism/Hegel, and aiding directly to the militarization of police in the US which actually hosts IDF and Mossadi juhadisctargeting US citizens
my criticism of junk science, police science, and pseudo science
NSA sending Americans data to and apartheid state, Israel
FVEYs black programs
Then: if you think our replies
Listen, identify yourself/ves, andvyour so-called community AC, or GTFO.
You barely merit a reply, much less me handing a coward like you evidence of anything other than your own cowardice and proif of your derailing, discrefiting trollish ways.
And with.you we schtick, you once again confuse yourself as James Randi Prize aspirant Colin Ross MPD nutjobs with that me/we pronoun confusion.
And this is a persistent delusion of yours, classic schizophrenic narrative, reffering to the voices in your head as werather than your mom in your badement echo chamber, screaming at you to get off that video game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawfare is “just some blog” AC?
Your turn, you lying, time wasting sociopathic psycho-sadist piece of garbage dipshit
Proof or GTFO: who are you to claim anyone, anywhere listens to you?
(Joe? Aaron? MIT rabbi-guy? You guys are carbon copy dipshits).
You are no one, to anyone, without a name, AC shitbag.
And no, I am not intentionally crediting Brookings Institutes Lawfare blog, because NPR covered that generic reveal of how cyber works first, last September or something.
And that, decades after people targeted by these shit CVE programs became vocal about it and wrote about it online as targeted individuals.
Yeah, this half-baked, sanitized reveal of how cyber works:
https://www.lawfareblog.com/integration-psychological-operations-cyber-operations
For all anyone knows, AC, you are the EXACT agency/NGO/think tank troll that I discuss all over my posts about online bullies and harassers.
So, in re, your delusions of grandeur (maybe go chomp a cigar) to whit your imaginary consensus that people like you, or agree with you on anything, ever. “Um, they do. A great deal of them. And not just on TD but all over the web”
all of your alleged fans, all over the whole internet, just adore AC shitposters? Now thats a delusion right there Jethro.We call you cowards* for a reason.
You and other vile cowardly ACs (none of whom can by definition prove they are part of the, “Techdirt community” in any sense of proof, or even human as opposed to unoriginal chatbots), have followed studiously behind any post I ever made here, and flagging, harranguing me and the post, with flame baiting racial epithets, and ad hominems, and hiding posts that were critical of or informative in regards to:
*DoD black programs, and due process free, non-consensual influence ops (aka psyops)online
the Alphabet soups child porn distribution habits
police brutality (and your whiteness condoning it too)
TDs establishment bent, and NGO/trollfarm biaded flaghing protocol
the racist ADL flying US police to the Gaza strip to to teach them about othering via Buberism/Hegel, and aiding directly to the militarization of police in the US which actually hosts IDF and Mossadi juhadisctargeting US citizens
my criticism of junk science, police science, and pseudo science
NSA sending Americans data to and apartheid state, Israel
FVEYs black programs
So, your tactics directly mirror the antagonism and harassment that targets have reported, all over the world.
Then: if you think our replies
Listen, identify yourself/ves, andvyour so-called community AC, or GTFO.
You barely merit a reply, much less me handing a coward like you evidence of anything other than your own cowardice and proof of your derailing, discretiting trollish ways, straight out of the JTRIG manual.
And with your we schtick, you once again confuse yourself with James Randi Prize aspirant Colin Ross MPD nutjobs, because like him you once claimed that lightning energy can shoot.out of your eyeballs,,and augmented with that me/we pronoun confusion.
And this is a persistent delusion of yours, classic schizophrenic AND MPD narrative, reffering to the voices in your head as we rather than your mom in your basement echo chamber, screaming at you to get off that video game.
And, well, I'm not dead.....yeah. Some things are unfortunate, but one can hope....Go Michael that over for awhile.
I urge you, dont think too long, your not good at it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lawfare is “just some blog” AC?
OK. Lets assume that you are,not a chatbot, and you care to engage in a legitimate fashion about proof of gang stalking
So, start with the most famous CIA poisoner Sydney Gottlieb associate Dr. Colin Ross, who once claimed that he had paranormal powers to shoot energy beams through his eyes, and tried to get the James Randi prize:
https://www.mind-energy.net/archives/298-dr-colin-a-ross-goes-for-the-1-million-prize.html
Th en (skipping over sheitloads of other CIA/DoD/USAF/OSID/Military intel whackjobs disinfo in between), have a look at the most famous case of DoD black budget pandering gang stalking denialism ever written:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/11/health/gang-stalking-targeted-individuals.html
And, how Sheridan, et al pop up in bizarre,awareness,campaigns thatvare guaranteed to discredit the topic, in this,case,alongside Dr. Christine Sarteschi of Chatham university:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/organized-stalking-vancouver-1.4813916
A nd how Sarteschi is herself a gang stalking profiteer:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christine_Sarteschi
Note that all of the above forensic psycholigists work closely with cold case investigators, prison psychologists, lawcenforcement intelligence units, etc.
Then, have a look at Dr. Tomo Shibata, whose anti-pornography thesis was juried by none other than Dr. Catherine McKinnon, whose daddy George was integral to starting the FISA court. FISA is the same secret court that recently sanctioned the FBI for its deceptive practices during the Carter Page warrant request debacle.
https://www.gofundme.com/f/end-torture
So, then, on a personal note, you seem to take umbrage over the fact that I think you are a coward, for stating as much by posting as an AC.
Maybe the Milgram experiment can help explain why anonymity breeds contempt, or simply excessive voltage:
https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html
Now, Dr. Thomas Szasz was a psychiatrist who saw through the fraud that multi billion dollar industry is, and who proposed more humane ways of understanding mental processes, and interactions with individuals.
He famously said “Psychiatric expert testimony: mendacity masquerading as medicine.”
And this gem:
“Narcissist: psychoanalytic term for the person who loves himself more than his analyst; considered to be the manifestation of a dire mental disease whose successful treatment depends on the patient learning to love the analyst more and himself less.”
He wrote about The Manufacture of Madness, long before I or Trevor Aaronson most famously publicized the term.“manufactured terrorism”
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacture-Madness-Comparative-Inquisition-Movement/dp/08156046 10
So, theres a start AC to understanding the battle for hearts and minds online.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
....Wow. I REALLY struck a nerve.
It doesn't matter who I am. No one should believe whatever random thing they are told without facts and proof to back it up. You've provided nothing reliable to prove any of what you've said.
Irrelevant. I'm still not taking what you say at face value without some evidence/proof to back it up.
You know, you've thrown a lot of accusations at me and others on here about a lot of stuff that A) you have no evidence of and B) you have no way of knowing. Not to mention the massive volume of vile vitriol and insults hurled in our direction. Now, to top it all off, you wish for my death. That is not how you win an argument and that's proof that you are deranged and mentally unstable. No rational, normal, human being would ever wish the death of another human over a disagreement of facts. But you do.
I suggest you get some professional help. Immediately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Proof of what, AC chatbot?
Proof that you didnt even read the article above? I think the evidence of that is the fact that nothing you have said here relates to the article, at all not once ever in this thread.
I mean, time after time, I have presented evidence -and notably you have never engaged with it, ever, while others have, most notably the cases of Rick and Cindy Krlich in Ohio, and Bob Deis, in Stockton CA, who were targeted with irganized gang stalking by police and fire unionists, public officials, and their circle of comrades.
And, re: A) you have no evidence of and B) you have no way of knowing
I think the Krlich and Deis cases are pretty solid proof of a verified social contagion, that has a specific name, dont you?
And even Masnick (....)covered the notorious gang stalking of Rose McGowan by Black Cube, after Ronan Farrow did the journalism first .
And about encryption -did they ever get into my phone? I was busy here in heaven with 36 virgins, after being cyberstalked by Muslim hatin ’ Rira Katz, and her racist SITE intel group.
So....
Yeah, I know, right? NO ONE should be able to cyberstalk, manipulate the communications of others, and make them feel bad, right?
(despite US cyber command and its,Muslin hatin butties doing EXACTLY THAT all over the world, and in the US too, with AMPLE PROOF everywhere, and here too. )
I know, it happened to me, then I died.
And this:
A) you have no evidence of and B) you have no way of knowing
AC, you might have noticed that as an AC, you have zero proof that I did anything to you, personally, or other Russian/ADL /Intel agency/Mossadi jihadi troll ACs and chatbots.
Simply put, youre just a derailer, and you never engage with the excellent materials presented by TDs excellent writers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Proof of your original claims that started this entire nonsense. I'm sorry you're so mentally unstable that you can't even remember what you wrote that started this whole thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually, agency-type troll/derailer/shitposter, youre wrong, again.
This epic seven week conversation, spanning about seven threads, started after Wendy Cocksoft called me an incel, whereby I began dissembling your type of tactics, and narrative, via an awareness campaign about your tactics and narrative.
Yeah, online PsyOps are a bad thing.
You, Tweedle Dum, are even bad at that. Now go take your ES appointment. Nurse Ratched awits you.
Psych
[stupid A is freaking out about double sevens now]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually, I believe it started when someone called one of our regulars an incel and a Nazi (in response to them pointing out that asexuals are in the LGBTQ community); then after you said something else, Wendy (among others) called you an incel, believing that you were that same person.
Now, it may be possible that this was a case of mistaken identity, though given that that comment and comments I know for certain came from you used the same derogatory nickname for that regular (I believe it was naschi), that appears unlikely. Still, I suppose it’s not completely impossible that you were mistaken for someone else. I’d also like to note that, even then, I didn’t think it made that much sense to “he who smelt it dealt it” being an incel, nor am I defending Wendy for doing so. I’m just noting that this went back a little before Wendy called you an incel.
It could also be argued that that was technically a separate discussion that provided the impetus for you to start making the claims that began the current discussion. After all, the topics of the two are rather different; the former was—depending on how you look at it—either just a meaningless argument consisting primarily of people just insulting each other or people arguing over the appropriateness of calling a particular person an incel and/or Nazi given previous comments in the same thread, while the latter has been a discussion of sorts about your claims regarding gang stalking, LEOs and “alphabet agencies” doing shady stuff, Techdirt’s moderation being weaponized, etc.
At any rate, I’m pretty sure that the AC is talking about the claims you’ve made about “[the AC’s or Techdirt’s] tactics and narrative,” the claims you made at the start of this discussion in this thread, or the claims you made at or near the start of “[t]his epic seven[-]week conversation, spanning about seven threads,” so exactly who “started it” or exactly when it started isn’t really material. Even in the third possibility, the issue is still regarding the claims you made at or near the beginning, even if it wasn’t what set off the whole thing. So really, quibbling about the details won’t actually change anything.
Still, you haven’t actually addressed the question at all. You merely summarized the reason for you making your claims and described them as you “dissembling [their] type of tactics, and narrative, via an awareness campaign about [their] tactics and narrative.” That doesn’t actually clarify the basis for those claims or offer any supporting evidence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:Pearls and Pork Eaters
bhull, you are totally late to this conversation, which actually, spans a few years.
re:Wendy (among others) called you an incel, believing that you were that same person
None of this actually matters because its weeks after the fact, and I have been having a great, amazing sex life as usual, I still have not seen you/her/them address the way that this forums commenters use that term.
What does matter is that I have (selfishly, perhaps) validated many personal thesis points herein, for future reference to things I will write elsewhere later.
And, most of those things would take too long to go into here for you, just you.
A brief recap:
how military/NGO/Psy Operators infitrate online conversations
how many TD readers are partisans or useful idiots who actually ENABLE bad practices
how my comments are followed in many online forums by exactly two ACs (which I have demonstrated repeatedly) when I use the same pseudonym online, or use the same device with an “electronic implant” or other zero day type malware on it
how speech policing and Psyops are related, and the organizations and contractors that participate in it, also contribute to mass homucides, with precipitating causal links like blackmail
bhull, I even note that, since I began to write about organized gang stalking, even notorious gang stalking denialist journalists like Laura Yan and Mike McPhate have changed their tune, and now, both write about either gangs in policing or online gangs of K3 and K4 flying monkeys cyber stalking and harassung speakers and writers.
Here is K4 affiliated L.Yans gang stalking denialsm in Wired magazine:
https://www.wired.com/story/mind-games-the-tortured-lives-of-targeted-individuals
and here is her, acknowleging how she and other ADLified writers and K4 tribalists literally gang up and cyberstalked a white male poet inline, and then, stalked him offline too:
https://theoutline.com/post/2488/collin-andrew-yost-the-most-hated-poet-in-portland?zd=2&zi =ggon7g3x
So, bhull, its more than I want to talk about right now, with you.
But Wendy definitIvely started it, as many TD commenters do also, when you point out their glaring inconsistencies and double standards of speech.
Note the chatbot troll below this post only rambles on to discredit my evidence, never having read such, ever.
Again, its proof enough (and replicable evidence at that) for me, and others who will read my finished product.
Suffice it to say, I think you have a good mind for editing, and your memory of events relatively clear, more clear than the AC below, but it takes way to much time to educate you, just you, bocause after awhile, we will always come back to you/them asking for proof of claims that I never made.
So, wut? bhull:doesn’t actually clarify the basis for those claims ...but you are frequently an effective derailer by your very nature, as you seek your own inclusion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The article was originally posted on, wait, let me check, yep, January 17th. It will be three weeks ago TOMORROW.
Unless I'm missing something or her post got flagged, I don't see where Wendy commented on this particular article. I only started commenting when you started spouting a bunch of baseless, conspiracy theory laden claims.
If you are continuing your attack based on comments she made in some other article, then might I suggest you take that up with her privately, instead of spamming up the place?
No one is disputing that. We're just saying they aren't as pervasive as you seem to think they are and in some specific cases, non-existent/not feasible.
That's expected since I'm not trying to engage in "PsyOps".
I'm not familiar with this particular reference and given I instantly regretted looking up the last insult you threw in my direction, I'm not inclined to look this one up either.
I do enjoy that show. Shawn and Gus are hilarious.
I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing here, especially since none of my posts can even remotely be considered freaking out, especially compared to yours. The only thing I can think you may be referring to double sevens is your "seven week/seven thread" remark. But, as I stated, unless you are continuing this from some other article from December, this article was only posted on January 17th, less than three weeks ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Pucker up Tweedle Dum, here it comes
（{⊙})
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the internet is a “real world?”
You are crazier and more out of touch than it appears at first glance.
re: I have no idea how you will survive the real world.
You should have stopped at “I have no idea”because that describes your abilities to a letter.
Bro, the internet is not the “real world” unless you think of that real world from a basement dwelling gamers perspective of MMPO gamers model, where you are at a console, and everyone else just a way to score.
Or, as if civilians and militaries are one blurred, equal entity, despite disproportionate powers, hierarchies, duties, and functions in your real world
For example, we are living now in a real world where the average civilians contact with cops, intel spies, and other elements that corrode democracies is less than one in thirty possible interactions offline with an extremely escalated possibility online.
THAT excessive contact is complimented by community policing which bears a much-remarked-about similarity to the East German Stasis playbook.
So, what real world do you speak about?
Clearly, one where there is no wall between military spying functions, trickling down to and infecting police powers, and civilians rights to be left alone.
This is as opposed to decades ago, when law and due process protected civilians (in theory, and occasionally in practice) from intel activities targeted at civilian life, primarily the rights of privacy, assembly, and association.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-07-31/mariia-butina-mission-impossible- and-the-spread-of-spies
And so, I relish the day when the commissars knock down your door, and say “democracy? Thats so retro, so boomer”while batoning your hatches.
That day has been here a very long time for others, who,arent anti-democratic DoD friendly fobs like you.
Do you want,evidence of that claim? See any and all posts where you flagged me for what I covered above.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: the internet is a “real world?”
It's MMO or MMORPG. I don't know what "MMPO" is but it has nothing to do with gaming.
58% of Americans play video games. There are millions of Americans who play MMOs. The vast majority of them are not basement dwellers. That's mostly a myth, with a very rare occasional real world person who typifies it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: the internet is a “real world?”
I stand corrected on the acronym, lol. And, 58%?
I actually havent heard it for decades, and dont waste my time with video games
But really, if partisan studies and polls constitute proof of anything, we’re doomed.
Or, Wikipedia for that matter.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're welcome.
Yes, 58%.
Heard what, exactly?
To each his own. But for those that enjoy them (such as the 58% of Americans who play them) they are far from a waste of time.
Which studies and polls would those be?
You know, a few posts up you accused me of not reading the article you posted (which I in fact did read), now you have done the exact thing you accused me of: not reading the article I posted. Hell, I don't think you even read the link you posted on criticism of Wikipedia.
No, Wikipedia is not a primary source, but it does, however, link back to a lot of ACTUAL primary sources and provides a starting point for doing your own research. Those primary sources it links back to contain the solid proof you claim is missing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
bhull, you would make a great editor.
OK:....Webterrogation, 101
re:Heard what, exactly?
MMO/massive multi player online game/MMPOG
for those that enjoy them
Yup. lots of folks. And, you, time wasting moron.
Pull your puddie much?
Um, see the section in your syllabus about disingenuous, time sucking online trolls
Or, send cash for the class. You still are not worth educating. I have thousands of links, but you havent levelled up, little puddie.
And:you accused me of not reading the article you posted
Beyond the fact that you feign ingenue violations, didnt you get that memo about how every time you click a link from an agency/ADL/NGO/Etalphabet/private DHS contractor-controlled forum, they clock your IP across the inet, like its a race or something?
Why would I EVER click a link from a vexatious Inet AC troll?
Idiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
………Thanks………I think……?
I mean, I do like editing, and I think I’m pretty good at it, so assuming you’re actually addressing me, this isn’t a case of mistaken identity, and that you’re being sincere rather than passive-aggressive or something, I actually do appreciate the comment. It’s just that I don’t know why you’re mentioning it in a reply to a comment by an AC. For the record, that AC isn’t me. I always sign in before commenting, and on the off-chance I forget to do so, I’ll sign in and clarify that the comment was mine.
For future reference, if the author of a comment isn’t signed in as bhull242 using my profile and there isn’t a follow-up comment that was signed in as bhull242 claiming that comment as mine, then I am not the author (assuming the comment was made in the past year or so).
Okay, I think I understand your confusion.
Multiplayer is one word; it isn’t hyphenated, and there are no spaces within it. MMO stands for “massively multiplayer online”.
And while we abbreviate “massively multiplayer online role-playing game” as MMORPG, “role-playing game” as RPG, and “Japanese role-playing game” as JRPG, outside of those specific cases, we never include the word “game” in any initialisms for a video game genre. In fact, we often exclude the word “game” entirely (cf. FPS or RTS).
For these reasons, when referring to games with similar multiplayer components as an MMORPG but not necessarily RPGs, we will refer to them as “MMO games” or just “MMOs” but not “MMPOGs”. We do not use a P to stand for “player” since that’s part of the word “multiplayer” represented by the second M, and we don’t include a G for “game” in any initialisms other than RPGs. (Well, we might for “video games” as VG or for certain titles, but not for genres.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, that explains why you don't know how to properly spell it. Just because you haven't heard it in decades, doesn't mean it hasn't been in use or actually increased in popularity.
As bhull noted, "multiplayer" is one word, so "MMPOG" is incorrect. Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) is the correct terminology. Technically you could also add "Game" and do MMOG but that's rarely used. MMO is used the most, followed by MMORPG, as MMOs started off (and continue to be) generally styled as an RPG.
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. It doesn't make you correct.
I actually hadn't heard that term before. I'm sorry I looked it up.
Since you can't be bothered to actually answer the question, I'm going to assume you're just making stuff up and can't answer the question without proving yourself to be a liar.
Yet here you are, still trying to educate me.
Really? I think you've provided at most a half dozen or less. Where's the rest?
Still waiting on those links.
Such as?
Well, yes, that's common knowledge. ANY website you visit logs your IP address. That's how the internet and the web work. Who owns it is irrelevant. So what you're saying is you didn't read my links because you didn't want your IP logged? Well, at least you admitted you didn't read it I guess. Since I read yours and you didn't read mine, I have even less of a reason to take your arguments seriously.
You're right. Despite the fact that you can clearly check the link prior to clicking on it to verify whether it is a legitimate site or not, by actually going to the site and reading what it has to say you might actually learn something, and what you learn may mean you are wrong. So heaven forbid you actually put yourself in that position.
I don't think this even needs a response at this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: re: is that you?
Do Stephen and I even live in the same country?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: re: is that you?
Is Stephen Pee Stone one of the voices in your head?
Then, Ochams [sic ] Razor posits that your head might fall off after you encounter bizarre, unconstitutional, due process violating CVE programs and their online /offline practitioners.
Well, actually, Ochams Razor posits that the shitbags who cyberstalk, harass, and radicalize people online using psychological operations will “cut their victims throats with Ochams Razor” meaning that CVE tactics,and programs deliberately skirt, and flaunt the rules, and worse, are intended to defy any rational analysis, or even known paradigms of logic or legality.
And, they will massively waste your time, too.
But please, dont just take my word for it, read this:
https://www.thoughtco.com/psychological-warfare-definition-4151867
And then, this quote, from Lawfare blog, documenting exactly the types of harassment that our own military targets at non -terrorists:
“Operation Glowing Symphony was intended to degrade and disrupt online Islamic State efforts for propaganda, communications, fundraising and recruitment. According to NPR, much of this effort focused on creating an endless series of technology annoyances and time-wasting interruptions that degraded and disrupted the workflow of Islamic State network operators significantly. The NPR report referred to these activities as
“#psychological operations with a high-tech twist” because they were intended to cause high levels of emotional frustration in Islamic State operators and presumably to degrade their operational effectiveness as a result.”
https://www.lawfareblog.com/integration-psychological-operations-cyber-operations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: re: is that you?
I only know Stephen through this website. I know nothing about him except through what he’s posted on this website. He’s also been on this site a lot longer than I have, and he comments a lot more often than I do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: re: is that you?
Yeah, hes a shut in, probably for legal reasons (51/50’d).
Mostly he seems like a really nice fellow with too much time on his hands, and a computer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Al Shamramis dibbuk is talking?!
My, oh my, does SITE Intelligence group appear out of nowhere/everywhere there is,a mass shooting!
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/10/terror-expert-reports-vegas-killer-stephen-paddoc k-isis/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, look! a "gang" of "security contractors" aka gang stalkers--which are ALWAYS current and retired military, police, and other spooks said and did bizarre stuff, and targeted a critic of eBay!
-sent them a bloody pig mask
-stalked them online and off
-etc.
That "gang" of "stalkers" was indicted by the feds too.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53055351
[ link to this | view in chronology ]