plot twist: The controllers actually WANT us to violently revolt.... when it happens, we destroy eachother, and they run to their super-bunkers with all their assets. Emerging to retake control easily. We can't let it come to that. They win during chaos OR order.... the only way we can win is to acknowledge they exist. Illuminate the shadowy figures for all to see.

We've all considered the idea that they want a violent revolt. We aren't going to destroy each other though right? We would destroy the mechanisms that hold us down I would hope.

I have been reading reddit for years and it has changed significantly since Digg collapsed.

There are now many shills and spooks gaming the submissions and comment sections.

You really have to step back and view everything with a wary eye.

Solution? Read as many different sources on the web as possible, mainstream, alternative , news bloggers, columnists. Get as much diversity as possible, use an RSS feed to efficiently get through it all.

which is possible witha job. hat tip to effectively scare the mainstream away.

Agreed.

You haven't stopped to think that they want to bring about an "American Spring"? Snowden is too public and talked about to be anything for real. If he was for real they would ignore it. This story was GIVEN to us. I have been saying since day 1 that this was a psyop. I'm no shill.

I have stopped to think about that. Many times. I do find it strange that the media has picked up his story so strongly in the same fashion they did Assange but I think that's only because there were those that knew the potency of the information he had planned to release beyond what we know already. So those that were gearing up for it, Hastings, Greenwald, made sure it was known that this guy is very important for potentially for reasons yet to be revealed to us. That is just a hunch.

Yes, and to me Psyop or not, what came of it was for the greater good. Cut the man some slack. He woke up 10's of thousands of people yet you still claim he's the bad guy.

(talking to the whole community, not just OP)

Despite this being an op, that doesn't necessarily make Snowden the bad guy. As has been discussed elsewhere, he could have easily be put in the position he was in because someone knew based on his personality type that he would blow the whistle. This works very well because then Snowden doesn't have to lie, he is a genuine whistleblower, and yet the establishment still gets the results they want, whether that be cowing the public into self-censorship or rising up in rebellion.

The Psyop is that he is being called a Psyop, by the Psyops, for the good of the Psyops. But it won't work.

lmao... yeah... basically...

Agreed OP. The authorities will try a number of ways of discrediting a whistleblower. First they will try to complete ignore him/her - pretend they a non-person. If that fails, they will deny the information, accusing him of being a liar. If the evidence is too strong, they will accuse the whistleblower of being a traitor, and if they can unearth any dirt on the individual he will be labelled a criminal.

If these strategies don't work, they will accuse him of being a self-publicist, an attention-seeker and profiteer. Finally, as with Snowden, where none of these accusations held any water, they will try to the partial hangout, and say he is still an active asset.

I don't believe any of these are true as regards Snowden.

I have to agree with you on this. If you can believe that Snowden was a psyop... then at what point do you actually draw the line? Surely everything that ever happens isn't a psyop. lol

and the recent news of a surveillance bug in the Ecuadorian embassy in London ... who would be doing that if it was a psyop ? Unless of course all the embassy rooms come "equipped" lol

Precisely. Thank you. lol

If you think the psyop was ineffective, I don't think you understood many of the points within the 'Snowden is a psyop' posts.

The surveillance state must reveal itself. What sort of revolution do you think will occur that will prevent the state from being able to clamp down?

I understand all of the points within the snowden was a psyop posts. But I think they are all flimsy and I also realize that the police state/surveillance state must reveal itself, but if Snowden was a psyop don't you think Assange would be aware? Or do you think he is being played as well?

If you are basing your decision on Assange's reaction, it's you making the massive assumptions.

Who is to say Assange isn't one of the players as well?

I've considered this. We're ALL making assumptions because we don't have accurate intel so we have no choice but to assume, but we all draw the line at different points of where we are willing to believe the psyop fabricated story ends and reality begins. I say, if there is a conspiracy, there would be a point where it would grow so large that whistleblowers would naturally be produced as shown in the past. That is all. I think they got lazy and fucked up.

I've considered this

Yet you didn't offer it as an option.

We're ALL making assumptions

What assumptions have I made? Be specific.

I say, if there is a conspiracy, there would be a point where it would grow so large that whistleblowers would naturally be produced as shown in the past. That is all. I think they got lazy and fucked up.

Where is this long history of whistleblowers and how is it a fuck up? Please do explain how this is at all remotely inconvenient for any of the spying agencies.

Who is to say Assange isn't one of the players as well?

That's an assumption you are trying to make. I'm sure there are more but that is all that I am currently aware of.

Where is this long history of whistleblowers and how is it a fuck up?

How about you do some research on whistleblowers? They are an integral part of our history and as far as I know, there hasn't yet been a psyop whistleblower historically speaking. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's not recorded that way.

That's an assumption you are trying to make. I'm sure there are mor

It's not an assumption I've made. In fact, you seem to have a complete misunderstanding of the tense as I never made the assumption. I've only not discounted the possibility. Which is the opposite of you. It's you that's making the assumptions. I never said whether Assange was a player or not, but the possibility is there and to act as if it isn't is an assumption.

How about you do some research on whistleblowers?

How about you tell me what you mean so I don't have to act like some sort of mind reader. As far as you know there hasn't been a psyop whistleblower historically.

Geez! I guess that settles it!

You're not a pleasant person to converse with... Also you read what you want to read rather than what is written.

So it's settled then... No need for further discussion.

Yeah? Please explain to me how assuming Assange isn't a spy isn't an assumption...

BECAUSE I NEVER SAID HE ISN'T A SPY. I don't have enough evidence for that as it is. I'm open to the possibility.

You say you are open to the possibility but everything you offered assumed he wasn't. What about that don't you understand?

Other than me, I know of no other person who is concerned or has ever once mentioned snowden, assange, etc. it is off the radar. I also just don't believe in being a follower, so wherever these guys are leading, I am not interested in following. These guys will only be paid attention to if someone progressive rolls their concerns into a political platform, like one that unites Ron Paulers with progressives.

it is the stupidest psyop I've ever heard of. Mostly because the American people and the world are now so infuriated, that revolution seems imminent

The more you resist, the more they can justify excessive force. "STOP RESISTING! (just kidding, keep resisting, we like smacking people around)"

If you are basing your decision on Assange's reaction, it's you making the massive assumptions.

Who is to say Assange isn't one of the players as well?