C'est qu'ils sont devenus une véritable force politique à eux seuls!
Un membre de l’administration Obama réclame « l’infiltration cognitive » des « groupes de conspiration sur le 11 septembre » Daniel Tencer
Dans un article académique de 2008, la personne nommée par le président Barack Obama à la tête de l’Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (Bureau de l’Information et des Affaires réglementaires) a recommandé l’« infiltration cognitive » des groupes qui promeuvent les « théories de conspiration » comme celles entourant le 11 septembre.
Cass Sunstein, professeur de droit à Harvard, est le co-auteur de cet article intitulé « Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures » (Les théories de conspiration : les causes et les remèdes), dans lequel il soutient que le gouvernement devrait infiltrer furtivement les groupes présentant des théories alternatives sur des événements historiques par le biais des « forums de discussion, des réseaux sociaux en ligne ou même des groupes en espaces réels et tenter de miner » ces groupes.
À titre de directeur de l’Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, M. Sunstein est responsable de la « supervision des politiques liées à la vie privée, de la qualité de l’information et des programmes statistiques », selon le site Web de la Maison-Blanche.
M. Sunstein
L’article de M. Sunstein, publié dans le Journal of Political Philosphy en 2008 et découvert récemment par le blogueur Marc Estrin, stipule : « [N]otre principale affirmation est que les théories de conspiration découlent non pas de l’irrationalité ou de la maladie mentale, mais d’une “épistémologie invalide”, venant sous la forme d’un nombre extrêmement limité de sources informationnelles (pertinentes) ».
Par « épistémologie invalide », M. Sunstein veut dire que les personnes croyant aux théories de conspiration ont un nombre limité de sources d’information auxquelles elles font confiance. Par conséquent, M. Sunstein avance dans l’article que le simple fait de réfuter les théories de conspiration en public ne fonctionnerait pas : il faudrait infiltrer les sources mêmes en lesquelles les théoriciens de conspiration croient.
M. Sunstein, dont l’article se concentre largement sur les théories de conspiration du 11 septembre, suggère que le gouvernement « enrôle des représentants non gouvernementaux afin de réfuter ces théories. Cela pourrait garantir que ce sont des experts indépendants crédibles qui présentent la contestation plutôt que des administrateurs gouvernementaux. Il existe toutefois un compromis entre la crédibilité et le contrôle. Le prix de la crédibilité est que l’on ne peut pas voir que le gouvernement contrôle les experts indépendants.
Téléchargez l’article en PDF ici.
M. Sunstein a par ailleurs soutenu que « le gouvernement pourrait employer des tactiques (légales) pour briser les groupes cognitifs serrés qui mettent de l’avant des théories extrêmes ». Il a suggéré que les « agents du gouvernement (et leurs alliés) se joignent à des forums de discussion, à des réseaux sociaux en ligne ou même à des groupes en espaces réels et tentent de miner des théories de conspiration en propagation en soulevant des doutes à propos de leurs fondements factuels, de leur logique causale ou de leur incidence pour l’action politique ».
« Nous nous attendons à de telles tactiques de la part d’agents d’infiltration ou du FBI, écrit M. Estrin sur Rag Blog, exprimant sa surprise quant à l’appui d’une telle stratégie par un « conseiller présidentiel de haut rang ».
M. Estrin souligne que, M. Sunstein préconise l’infiltration de groupes « extrémistes » afin de saper la confiance de ces groupes au point où « les nouvelles recrues seront suspectes et les participants des réseaux virtuels de ces groupes douteront de la bonne foi l’un de l’autre ».
M. Sunstein a été lui-même la cible de nombreuse « théories de conspiration », principalement de la chambre d’écho politique de droite et des émissions de chaises conservatrices prétendant qu’il est en faveur du décret d’un “second Bill of Rights”, lequel abolirait le deuxième amendement. Le dernier livre de M. Sunstein, « On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done » (Les rumeurs : comment les mensonges se propagent, pourquoi nous les croyons, ce que nous pouvons faire) a été critiqué par certaines personnes de droite et qualifié de « plan directeur pour la censure en ligne ».
M. Sunstein « désire détenir des blogues et des hébergeurs Web responsables des remarques des commentateurs sur les sites Web, tout en changeant les lois sur la diffamation afin qu’il soit plus facile d’intenter un procès pour propagation de “rumeurs”, écrit Ed Lasky sur American Thinker.
Article en anglais : Obama Staffer Calls for "Cognitive Infiltration" of " 9/11 Conspiracy Groups", publication originale, le 15 janvier 2010.
In a 2008 academic paper, President Barack Obama's appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs advocated "cognitive infiltration" of groups that advocate "conspiracy theories" like the ones surrounding 9/11.
Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor, co-wrote an academic article entitled "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures," in which he argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via "chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine" those groups.As head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Sunstein is in charge of "overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs," according to the White House Web site.
Sunstein's article, published in the Journal of Political Philosphy in 2008 and recently uncovered by blogger Marc Estrin, states that "our primary claim is that conspiracy theories typically stem not from irrationality or mental illness of any kind but from a 'crippled epistemology,' in the form of a sharply limited number of (relevant) informational sources."
By "crippled epistemology" Sunstein means that people who believe in conspiracy theories have a limited number of sources of information that they trust. Therefore, Sunstein argued in the article, it would not work to simply refute the conspiracy theories in public -- the very sources that conspiracy theorists believe would have to be infiltrated.
Sunstein, whose article focuses largely on the 9/11 conspiracy theories, suggests that the government "enlist nongovernmental officials in the effort to rebut the theories. It might ensure that credible independent experts offer the rebuttal, rather than government officials themselves. There is a tradeoff between credibility and control, however. The price of credibility is that government cannot be seen to control the independent experts."
Download a PDF of the article here.
Sunstein argued that "government might undertake (legal) tactics for breaking up the tight cognitive clusters of extremist theories." He suggested that "government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."
"We expect such tactics from undercover cops, or FBI," Estrin writes at the Rag Blog, expressing surprise that "a high-level presidential advisor" would support such a strategy.
Estrin notes that Sunstein advocates in his article for the infiltration of "extremist" groups so that it undermines the groups' confidence to the extent that "new recruits will be suspect and participants in the group’s virtual networks will doubt each other’s bona fides."
Sunstein has been the target of numerous "conspiracy theories" himself, mostly from the right wing political echo chamber, with conservative talking heads claiming he favors enacting "a second Bill of Rights" that would do away with the Second Amendment. Sunstein's recent book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, was criticized by some on the right as "a blueprint for online censorship."
Sunstein "wants to hold blogs and web hosting services accountable for the remarks of commenters on websites while altering libel laws to make it easier to sue for spreading 'rumors,'" wrote Ed Lasky at American Thinker.
Top Obama czar: Infiltrate all 'conspiracy theorists' Presidential adviser wrote about crackdown on expressing opinions Posted: January 14, 2010 12:30 am EasternBy Aaron Klein © 2010 WorldNetDaily
Cass Sunstein
|
In a lengthy academic paper, President Obama's regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban "conspiracy theorizing."
Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.
Sunstein also recommended the government send agents to infiltrate "extremists who supply conspiracy theories" to disrupt the efforts of the "extremists" to propagate their theories.
In a 2008 Harvard law paper, "Conspiracy Theories," Sunstein and co-author Adrian Vermeule, a Harvard law professor, ask, "What can government do about conspiracy theories?"
"We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories."
In the 30-page paper – obtained and reviewed by WND – Sunstein argues the best government response to "conspiracy theories" is "cognitive infiltration of extremist groups."
Continued Sunstein: "We suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies (acting either virtually or in real space, and either openly or anonymously) will undermine the crippled epistemology of believers by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity."
Read more about Cass Sunstein's agenda in "Shut Up, America!: The End of Free Speech"
Sunstein said government agents "might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."
Sunstein defined a conspiracy theory as "an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role."
Some "conspiracy theories" recommended for ban by Sunstein include:
- "The theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud."
- "The view that the Central Intelligence Agency was responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."
- "The 1996 crash of TWA flight 800 was caused by a U.S. military missile."
- "The Trilateral Commission is responsible for important movements of the international economy."
- "That Martin Luther King Jr. was killed by federal agents."
- "The moon landing was staged and never actually occurred."
Sunstein allowed that "some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true."
He continued: "The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the CIA did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of 'mind control.'”
Sunstein's paper advocating against the belief that global warming is a deliberate fraud was written before November's climate scandal in which e-mails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K. indicate top climate researchers conspired to rig data and keep researchers with dissenting views from publishing in leading scientific journals.
Sunstein: Ban 'right wing' rumors
Sunstein's paper is not the first time he has advocated banning the free flow of information.
WND reported that in a recently released book, "On Rumors," Sunstein argued websites should be obliged to remove "false rumors" while libel laws should be altered to make it easier to sue for spreading such "rumors."
In the 2009 book, Sunstein cited as a primary example of "absurd" and "hateful" remarks, reports by "right-wing websites" alleging an association between President Obama and Weatherman terrorist William Ayers.
He also singled out radio talker Sean Hannity for "attacking" Obama regarding the president's "alleged associations."
Ayers became a name in the 2008 presidential campaign when it was disclosed he worked closely with Obama for years. Obama also was said to have launched his political career at a 1995 fundraiser in Ayers' apartment.
'New Deal Fairness Doctrine'
WND also previously reported Sunstein drew up a "First Amendment New Deal" – a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would include the establishment of a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure "diversity of view" on the airwaves.
Sunstein compared the need for the government to regulate broadcasting to the moral obligation the U.S. had to impose new rules that outlawed segregation.
Sunstein's radical proposal, set forth in his 1993 book "The Partial Constitution," received no news media attention and scant scrutiny until the WND report.
In the book, Sunstein outwardly favors and promotes the "Fairness Doctrine," the abolished FCC policy that required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance in a manner the government deemed "equitable and balanced."
Sunstein introduces what he terms his "First Amendment New Deal" to regulate broadcasting in the U.S.
His proposal, which focuses largely on television, includes a government requirement that "purely commercial stations provide financial subsidies to public television or to commercial stations that agree to provide less profitable but high-quality programming."
Sunstein wrote it is "worthwhile to consider more dramatic approaches as well."
He proposes "compulsory public-affairs programming, right of reply, content review by nonpartisan experts or guidelines to encourage attention to public issues and diversity of view."
The Obama czar argues his regulation proposals for broadcasting are actually presented within the spirit of the Constitution.
"It seems quite possible that a law that contained regulatory remedies would promote rather than undermine the 'freedom of speech,'" he writes.
Writes Sunstein: "The idea that government should be neutral among all forms of speech seems right in the abstract, but as frequently applied it is no more plausible than the idea that it should be neutral between the associational interests of blacks and those of whites under conditions of segregation."
Sunstein contends the landmark case that brought about the Fairness Doctrine, Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, "stresses not the autonomy of broadcasters (made possible only by current ownership rights), but instead the need to promote democratic self-government by ensuring that people are presented with a broad range of views about public issues."
He continues: "In a market system, this goal may be compromised. It is hardly clear that 'the freedom of speech' is promoted by a regime in which people are permitted to speak only if other people are willing to pay enough to allow them to be heard."
In his book, Sunstein slams the U.S. courts' unwillingness to "require something like a Fairness Doctrine" to be a result of "the judiciary's lack of democratic pedigree, lack of fact-finding powers and limited remedial authority."
He clarifies he is not arguing the government should be free to regulate broadcasting however it chooses.
"Regulation designed to eliminate a particular viewpoint would of course be out of bounds. All viewpoint discrimination would be banned," Sunstein writes.
But, he says, "at the very least, regulative 'fairness doctrines' would raise no real doubts" constitutionally.
Soros funds infiltration of 9/11 truth, election protection, and “independent” journalism By Wayne Madsen Online Journal Contributing Writer Feb 20, 2009, 00:28
(WMR) -- WMR has learned from well-placed sources that international hedge fund mogul and financier of “progressive” causes George Soros has been, for a number of years, infiltrating 9/11 “truth” organizations, groups advocating election reform, and so-called “independent journalism” enterprises in order to hijack agendas and, eventually, cause the groups to collapse from within or be absorbed into larger organizations servile to Soros and his agenda.
By far, the largest group Soros and his allies has infiltrated and taken over is the Democratic Party of the United States. It now totally adheres to a corporatist line and has purged from its leadership Dr. Howard Dean and replaced him with Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, a Democratic Leadership Council adherent. The Soros faction and its allies has also seen to it that Bill Richardson, Caroline Kennedy, and others who represent the “Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” have been shut out of the Obama administration.
In many ways, Soros’ operation is strikingly similar to the FBI’s former Counter-Intelligence Program, also known as COINTELPRO. There is also ample evidence that Soros’ program is linked to Israeli intelligence operations in the United States and that some presidential campaigns in 2008 were infiltrated by the joint operation, including those of Democratic candidate and former Senator Mike Gravel, and Republican candidate Ron Paul.
Soros’ operations, according to our sources, involve his Open Society Institute, as well as Soros Fund Management LLC, in which his son, Jonathan Soros, plays a leading role.
For Soros, his political operations in America are much the same as they are in places like Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Romania, and other countries: divide, confuse the political sides, and conquer.
The modus operandi is that Soros operatives either help establish “progressive” organizations or join them after they are established with a new infusion of a modest to substantial funding. The agenda of the organization is then altered to make it look either like a far-out “conspiracy” association or the infiltrators of the organization create internecine battles between factions or tamp down its fervor. In some cases, the organizations ultimately cease to exist or are combined with other Soros-controlled or influenced organizations.
In the case of alternative journalism operations, Soros’ operatives launch attacks, some of them highly personal, against bona fide independent journalists and question their sources and investigations. WMR has been a primary target for such operations, according to sources familiar with Soros’ tactics.
Soros’ agents of disinformation and influence have moved in to “manage” the stories about jailed Alabama Democratic Governor Don Siegelman, the 2004 vote fraud in Ohio, the Turkish and Israeli intelligence penetration of the highest echelons of the U.S. government, the presence of Israeli spies among the accused 9/11 hijackers in the months prior to the terrorist attacks in 2001, and Russian-Israeli “Kosher Nostra” criminal activity from London to Kyiv and New York to Moscow.
Overall, Soros’ operations are primarily focused on controlling the left through the use of censors and online gatekeepers in the media operations he funds. Recipients of Soros’ money are found running web sites, some of them well known; hosting TV and radio programs; and writing regularly for major periodicals.
Soros has ingratiated himself to many on the Left but that was his goal. However, there are a number of progressives who are wise to Soros’ operations and will continue to expose them regardless of how many more billions he amasses from shorting stocks, speculating on national currencies, and destroying jobs.
With the palindrome SOROS -- if you replace the “S’s” with $ -- as in $oro$, you will be left with “oro,” the Italian and Spanish word for “gold.” It sums up Mr. Soros nicely, if that is his real name, and not “Goldfinger.”
Previously published in the Wayne Madsen Report.
Copyright © 2008 WayneMadenReport.com
Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and nationally-distributed columnist. He is the editor and publisher of the Wayne Madsen Report (subscription required).Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Soros funds infiltration of 9/11 truth, election protection, and “independent” journalism Le même personnage bizarre a permis que des organes soient prélevés sur des gens hospitalisés sans leur consentement! Obama Regulation Czar Advocated Removing People’s Organs Without Explicit Consent Friday, September 04, 2009 By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
Cass Sunstein speaking at Harvard Law School. (Photo: Matthew W. Hutchins, Harvard Law Record.) (CNSNews.com) – Cass Sunstein, President Barack Obama’s nominee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), has advocated a policy under which the government would “presume” someone has consented to having his or her organs removed for transplantation into someone else when they die unless that person has explicitly indicated that his or her organs should not be taken. Under such a policy, hospitals would harvest organs from people who never gave permission for this to be done. (read the rest here)
Cass Sunstein (Zionist) Predicts Repealing Right To Bear Arms Cass Sunstein, Obama's Regulatory Czar, predicts that the 2nd Amendment (Right to Bear Arms) will be repealed in 3 or 4 years in lecture at University of Chicago School of Law on October 27, 2007.
VIDEO - Obama's Top Czar Cass Sunstein Predicts The End Of The Right To Bear Arms
Sur ce blog:
Les chèvres de Judas mènent le mouvement de vérité à l'abattoir
Mise au point: quelques exemples de déstabilisation sociale-cognitive
