thornhappy
Posts: 8596
Joined: 12/16/2006 Status: offline
|
This is why I usually disregard prisonplanet in particular, and conspiracy sites in general... Hunk, there are a lot of lies in that article, especially the references to censoring talk about global warming, Oswald, the "sunlight prevents some cancers" (there's a lot more to the story), Holocaust deniers, rewriting the First Amendment, and "celebrating tax day" (which is not in the paper, but it's in Wikipedia). Everything else was taken out of context. You can see the paper here, using the Scribd window. It's a lot more information, and explains the advantages and disadvantages of all the approaches (and there were a lot of disadvantages with infiltration). Taxation was ruled out early. For the remark about censorship on page 21 of the paper. It's seen as generally unnecessary in an open society, and self defeating - even serving to reinforce the conspiracy theory. Similar points were raised about infiltrating groups, whether the government agents identified themselves, or were anonymous. They said that the hard core wouldn't be convinced of anything anyways, and it could simply spawn even more conspiracies. I think the idea of infiltration wouldn't get much mileage due to the poor results of these activities in the past; the paper gives a lot of examples of different ways to counter conspiracies. In general, white papers are like thought exercises - you come up with a lot of possibilities, and ways to deal with them. They can also be astoundingly impractical in the real world. This last line from the prisonplanet article is bullshit: "That is why they are now engaging in full on information warfare in an effort to undermine, disrupt and eventually outlaw organized peaceful resistance to their growing tyranny" Damn, guys, it was a white paper. It's not policy.
|