The art of disinformation.

[Duane Daman]

Steve, pursuant to the issue of potential agents of provocation in research forums, and to the potential mental health issues alluded to previously....

the thing I keep trying to deal with in various encounters is when I read something that seems odd or ridiculous to me, particularly coming from someone who garners respect, I only seem to be able to come to two conclusion: either they're just really, really stupid, or they're doing it on purpose

You're missing a third option, that you were wrong about it being odd or rediculous. And I don't mean it as an ad-hom or anything else, but if you honestly think the only 2 posibilities when you disagree with someone is that they are wrong or they are lying, you've must have godlike knowledge and infalibility.

... Sometimes I think Kevin posts here just to see his name on the board ... Or perhaps just to cover up mine ?

[Kevin M. West]

Hell of an ego you've got there Duane, thinking that my posts have anything at all to do with you. Here's a hint... I was replying to someone else, not you.

Was I wrong? Or is Daniel's intuition 100% infallible and he shouldn't even consider the posibility that he is incorrect?

[Peter McKenna]

Actually Peter, I was thinking along similar lines to Len (if I get his meaning); you have stated things quite correctly, except they apply to other than the people you had in mind - I think.

The problem is that on the internet the provacateur can create a lot of havoc in a short time. I'm sure we all have certain names in mind....They ask you to document it further...and then further. Then later, to document it all over again.

I wasn't really sure about this one, exactly what you meant. I had in mind the way some people raise a proposition, have it disproven, then wait for a while and then raise it again - ignoring the challenges that were given previously.

They naysay and cast doubt.

Correct. As soon as something happens, it is a CIA plot or a secret government experiment gone wrong or another example of.... something like that. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

They made attacks on the person more often than the information.

This more than anything makes me think of one individual. They complain about ad homs whilst are dishing them out all the time - and rarely actually address the argument given to them.

They divert threads and which they choose is always of interest.

Unsure of meaning.

They try to tempt one to spend all of one's time convincing them [when they can't be convinced...they came with fixed ideology] so the thread doesn't progress and others of good will can't interact easily.

Yep, there is no changing of their opinion. My objective is to show a different opinion, provide alternative explanations, and to highlight where inaccuracies have occurred.

Speaking of the art of disinformation , the above quote would have to be a prime example of this ....There's nothing like twisting other people's words around to have the opposite meaning ... and in doing so , suit their own agenda ..... Correct me if I'm wrong Peter , but it appears that Evan missed your point entirely .

I have been reading (in my spare time) some older literature on the SDS and the Weather Underground (including works referenced by Stephen and Daniel, thanks). Some interesting information found was included in the book "KGB: The Hidden Hand", By John Barron 1983. I was given this book by a friend who lived in the USSR and came to the US in 1972 under the Helsinki Agreement. Needless to say he was a virulent anti-Soviet.

"The Hidden hand" identifies that the KGB, esp. through Cuban surrogates, supported the terrorists (Weathermen) in the antiwar movement. "The support included training, financial aid, and instructions in maintaining clandestine communications".another weatherman was in Canada being instructed by a Russian advisor on how to make bombs." "Three Soviet agents were expelled from Liberia, Africa, for inciting riots in 1979". This information was supposedly classified, but was put into public record subsequent to the trial of FBI executives W. Mark Felt and Edward S. Miller in 1980.

Within the organizational structure and charter of the KGB are mandates for the recruitment and use of "illegals", persons outside of the diplomatic community, whose objectives included infiltration of the US Government, penetration of its security services, and inciting civil unrest within and without the United States, in addition to gathering intelligence. These activities fell under the auspices of the 1st Chief Directorate. (Reference KGB: The Hidden hand). This is just one example of published information linking the USSR and the anti Vietnam War movement in the US.

Today, as the Soviet bogey-man has disappeared, terrorism has replaced it as the chief mission for the US security services. Slowly the public is becoming aware of the Kafkaesque apparatus that has evolved, and is still evolving within and without the US to fight terrorism. Much of it, I’m sure, is engaged and effective. Some of it, as is becoming obvious, is not.

It has been reported in the Media, that some innocents were detained at Guantanamo Bay, and although, under the new strict definitions for "Torture", they may not have been "Tortured", the experience likely left a bad impression of the American system of justice. (There's a movie out, I can't remember the name, about two of the detainees, which would be fairly frightening to middle easterners, it was to me). Citizens of other countries, once considering the US, a bastion of fairness, may no longer consider us a 'just' society, as a result of our current policies. Our foreign policy, much of it tinged with a peripheral point of agenda, in addressing terrorism, and invoking, as a result, a certain degree of 'control' in our foreign influence, has obviously drawn criticism from many would-be 'friendly nations', and many more, not-so-friendly. In the days of Soviet influence, this was part of the price of doing business and accepted by most as a necessary 'evil'. Today that mission objective is far more elliptical, and difficult to assimilate, regardless of the truth or reality of it.

To suggest that there are several agent provocateurs on this forum, engaging in disinformation tactics, is just plain silly. That would imply that resources have been applied to hundreds, maybe thousands of such forums, in an effort to 'Control' discourse, in such a way as to disrupt it and render it impotent. That really is self flattery to the point of being pedantic, especially relating to the Apollo program. I would imagine that Security Services are involved in screening the internet for National security issues, but would not have the resources to engage in much disinformation on sites where political discourse takes place. There must be thousands of such sites.

However, such accusations do take a toll. They do bog down discourse, create dichotomy, and enmity, often causing members to spend inordinate amounts of time in argument. Accusing someone of being a 'Dis-informationist' or 'Provocateur' accomplishes precisely what the accusation implies, without requiring the involvement of a de facto agent. It is a destructive comment.

Also any real act of disinformation would likely use the model "a lie should be as close to the truth as possible". Therefore the process of disproving a mountainous volume of minutia would likely controvert an act of disinformation anyway. Regardless it seems to be (IMO) a tremendous waste of time, but I guess that would hardly dissuade anyone from continuing to make such accusations.

There is no doubt that disinformation tactics exist. In certain cases, it may be prudent. I just doubt it is as widespread as some would indicate.

Edited August 17, 2007 by Peter McKenna

[Duane Daman]

Hell of an ego you've got there Duane, thinking that my posts have anything at all to do with you. Here's a hint... I was replying to someone else, not you.

Was I wrong? Or is Daniel's intuition 100% infallible and he shouldn't even consider the posibility that he is incorrect?

Hey , lighten up there Kev ... I didn't say that your post had anything to do with me ... I was merely trying to figure out what the hell you were attempting to say , and having a little fun with your rather strange wording .

BTW , I sure have missed you on YouTube "phunkytowel" ... be sure to come back and post some of your memorable and meaningful comments again sometimes , ok ?

[Duane Daman]

There is no doubt that disinformation tactics exist. In certain cases, it may be prudent. I just doubt it is as widespread as some would indicate.

I don't doubt that these tactics exist either ... but I will have to disagree with you on this point ... I believe it's more widespread on internet discussion forums than most people could ever imagine .

Edited August 18, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Peter McKenna]

There is no doubt that disinformation tactics exist. In certain cases, it may be prudent. I just doubt it is as widespread as some would indicate.

I don't doubt that these tactics exist either ... but I will have to disagree with you on this point ... I believe it's more widespread on internet discussion forums than most people could ever imagine .

Allright then, as a hypothetical, how many people on how many forums would you guess are agent provocateurs? Assume that chat rooms tied to the media, esp. politically centrist media, are included.

Just as an experiment.

Edited August 18, 2007 by Peter McKenna

[Peter McKenna]

There is no doubt that disinformation tactics exist. In certain cases, it may be prudent. I just doubt it is as widespread as some would indicate.

I don't doubt that these tactics exist either ... but I will have to disagree with you on this point ... I believe it's more widespread on internet discussion forums than most people could ever imagine .

Allright then, as a hypothetical, how many people on how many forums would you guess are agent provocateurs? Assume that chat rooms tied to the media, esp. politically centrist media, are included.

Just as an experiment.

My own guess is there have been at different times a handfull, at least, on this Forum. There are many forums on the internet that cover politics, however as John Simkin has so proudly pointed out many times on many google searches on what I'd call hot button names and topics, this forum comes up on the first page, often in the top three positions, sometimes #1. You think the NSA computers didn't find the same result? You don't think there are people in the intelligence agencies who would like to shape history to their spin on the internet and in the media....?

Peter,

I am attempting to obtain a report or census on the number of worldwide internet forums and discussion groups. There are several internet statistics reports including governance, demographics, and trends, however there appears to be a diverging abundance of information as to the actual population of these sites. There appears to be thousands, though. The dominant demographic appears to be in the educational community, followed by political, which may explain the prominence of the Education Forum.

If discussion groups, attached to political devices such as e-magazines, think tanks, advocate groups, political analysts, candidates, and political parties are included, and chat rooms which also can be either non-affiliated, or affiliated (but still diverse), the overall population should be quite large. I don’t know that I could approximate the total population.

The COMMINTEL portion of the NSA is surely the largest. The NSA is rumored to have at least ten times the resources of the CIA. However my understanding of their modus operandi is to filter all electronic communications using keyword patterns in search of specific national security concerns. Of course the Patriot act and prior efforts concentrated on US to/from outside US communications of all varieties, to locate candidate risk entities for targeted surveillance. It is doubtful that the NSA would entertain intrusive methods such as inserting agents into groups either for manipulation of opinion or to spread disinformation, other than possibly foreign missions where specific individuals could be targeted in a specific operation of some sort (although I can’t think of a specific example, possibly something like establishing a legend of a group or individual to support some operation, I don’t really know).

Inside the US, the personality of a tactical approach seems to have been the FBI/Justice Dept. targeting groups or individuals to damage credibility, where the interests of the ‘inner circle’ of Washington’s movers were best served. This was mindful of Hoover’s MO. If extrapolated to the diverse media and many streams of internet discussion, and barring just using the keyword search/pattern program type of operation, using individuals to sit and engage in discussion to argue the ‘Company Line’ in the political arena would need a large population and a hefty price tag.

Not to belittle the influence of the Education Forum, I'm sure there are hundreds of other sites where such a tactic would wield more influence (such as sites that are watched closely by the Pols to gain insights, such as the Hudson Institute, Rockefeller Foundation, The Ford Foundation, The Washington Group, The Mclaughlin Group, The Capitol Gang, and the list goes on and on. The discussion groups which interact with these celebrities have some influence in providing the tenor of current thinking, more, I would think than the Education Forum. Either way I don't believe the NSA would be a party to this, it’s not really their ‘thing’. Unless an individual(s) in the Education Forum have been targeted, more for their ability to lead, organize, and influence critical thinking, than to express it, I really doubt that there would be an excess of resources expended on supplying disinformation, on the fly, to change anyone’s opinion. For one thing, how many people on this forum are likely to alter their opinions based upon another member's input (unless concrete proof, with references, photos, and smoking gun are collected and placed on the evidence table for scrutiny)?

I just don’t believe that its very likely. But stranger things have happened.

The reference I gave from the book 'KGB: the hidden hand' may have been disinformation (I don’t think so but I am aware of the distinct possibility, given the virulent anti-Soviet stance of the 1980’s right wing). If that was so and this book was touted as a bona fide compendium, a comprehensive study of Soviet influence in the world, on a highly visible talk show, that would (IMO) be a classic act of disinformation. The Education Forum is not a likely podium for a Deus ex Machina of this caliber (nor would many on this forum buy that one).

Anyway, to sum up, do I think the Education Forum may be scrutinized by the US Security Services? Probably. However, I doubt if they actively sit in and attempt to spread disinformation. You know that after a while, as you read an individuals contributions over the months or years, contributors' personalities seems to seep out and they become more or less somewhat predictable, and contributions therefore, take on a tinge of the author's personality. That makes it very hard and very resource intensive to become effective at that type of operation (as a blanket operation).

If a site sprang into existence, with a focus on say, establishing a Fundamentalist Islamic relief fund for Iraq, than yes, I do believe they would garner much interest from the intelligence community, and more from the intel gathering POV, than any seeding of disinfo.

Sorry to be so long, but I guess this reply is inversely proportional to the ability to actually cite references. So much of this is my opinion backed up by observation and past examples of the past modus operandi of COINTELPRO.

Edited August 18, 2007 by Peter McKenna

[Peter McKenna]

There is no doubt that disinformation tactics exist. In certain cases, it may be prudent. I just doubt it is as widespread as some would indicate.

I don't doubt that these tactics exist either ... but I will have to disagree with you on this point ... I believe it's more widespread on internet discussion forums than most people could ever imagine .

Allright then, as a hypothetical, how many people on how many forums would you guess are agent provocateurs? Assume that chat rooms tied to the media, esp. politically centrist media, are included.

Just as an experiment.

My own guess is there have been at different times a handfull, at least, on this Forum. There are many forums on the internet that cover politics, however as John Simkin has so proudly pointed out many times on many google searches on what I'd call hot button names and topics, this forum comes up on the first page, often in the top three positions, sometimes #1. You think the NSA computers didn't find the same result? You don't think there are people in the intelligence agencies who would like to shape history to their spin on the internet and in the media....?

Peter,

I am attempting to obtain a report or census on the number of worldwide internet forums and discussion groups. There are several internet statistics reports including governance, demographics, and trends, however there appears to be a diverging abundance of information as to the actual population of these sites. There appears to be thousands, though. The dominant demographic appears to be in the educational community, followed by political, which may explain the prominence of the Education Forum.

If discussion groups, attached to political devices such as e-magazines, think tanks, advocate groups, political analysts, candidates, and political parties are included, and chat rooms which also can be either non-affiliated, or affiliated (but still diverse), the overall population should be quite large. I don't know that I could approximate the total population.

The COMMINTEL portion of the NSA is surely the largest. The NSA is rumored to have at least ten times the resources of the CIA. However my understanding of their modus operandi is to filter all electronic communications using keyword patterns in search of specific national security concerns. Of course the Patriot act and prior efforts concentrated on US to/from outside US communications of all varieties, to locate candidate risk entities for targeted surveillance. It is doubtful that the NSA would entertain intrusive methods such as inserting agents into groups either for manipulation of opinion or to spread disinformation, other than possibly foreign missions where specific individuals could be targeted in a specific operation of some sort (although I can't think of a specific example, possibly something like establishing a legend of a group or individual to support some operation, I don't really know).

Inside the US, the personality of a tactical approach seems to have been the FBI/Justice Dept. targeting groups or individuals to damage credibility, where the interests of the 'inner circle' of Washington's movers were best served. This was mindful of Hoover's MO. If extrapolated to the diverse media and many streams of internet discussion, and barring just using the keyword search/pattern program type of operation, using individuals to sit and engage in discussion to argue the 'Company Line' in the political arena would need a large population and a hefty price tag.

Not to belittle the influence of the Education Forum, I'm sure there are hundreds of other sites where such a tactic would wield more influence (such as sites that are watched closely by the Pols to gain insights, such as the Hudson Institute, Rockefeller Foundation, The Ford Foundation, The Washington Group, The Mclaughlin Group, The Capitol Gang, and the list goes on and on. The discussion groups which interact with these celebrities have some influence in providing the tenor of current thinking, more, I would think than the Education Forum. Either way I don't believe the NSA would be a party to this, it's not really their 'thing'. Unless an individual(s) in the Education Forum have been targeted, more for their ability to lead, organize, and influence critical thinking, than to express it, I really doubt that there would be an excess of resources expended on supplying disinformation, on the fly, to change anyone's opinion. For one thing, how many people on this forum are likely to alter their opinions based upon another member's input (unless concrete proof, with references, photos, and smoking gun are collected and placed on the evidence table for scrutiny)?

I just don't believe that its very likely. But stranger things have happened.

The reference I gave from the book 'KGB: the hidden hand' may have been disinformation (I don't think so but I am aware of the distinct possibility, given the virulent anti-Soviet stance of the 1980's right wing). If that was so and this book was touted as a bona fide compendium, a comprehensive study of Soviet influence in the world, on a highly visible talk show, that would (IMO) be a classic act of disinformation. The Education Forum is not a likely podium for a Deus ex Machina of this caliber (nor would many on this forum buy that one).

Anyway, to sum up, do I think the Education Forum may be scrutinized by the US Security Services? Probably. However, I doubt if they actively sit in and attempt to spread disinformation. You know that after a while, as you read an individuals contributions over the months or years, contributors' personalities seems to seep out and they become more or less somewhat predictable, and contributions therefore, take on a tinge of the author's personality. That makes it very hard and very resource intensive to become effective at that type of operation (as a blanket operation).

If a site sprang into existence, with a focus on say, establishing a Fundamentalist Islamic relief fund for Iraq, than yes, I do believe they would garner much interest from the intelligence community, and more from the intel gathering POV, than any seeding of disinfo.

Sorry to be so long, but I guess this reply is inversely proportional to the ability to actually cite references. So much of this is my opinion backed up by observation and past examples of the past modus operandi of COINTELPRO.

Of course, the NSA [and there are others...at least two others I know of] that gather electronic information - mostly illegally, but the way. They do it by computer sifting of keywords and also with private communication by phone numbers, location, timing and all sorts of other things...but lets concentrate on internet. They sift it all...and I mean ALL...the computers do....when certain key words are found that information is passed to the next rank of computers [they have the best and most powerful computers in the world..and lots of them] to see it fits whatever criteria they have to be passed on to yet another bank of computers...etc. They know which sites are of 'interest' to them and of those someone somewhere [likely not a computer] makes decisions if they should be monitored in real time by a person or computer, hacked and brought down, fed 'other information' or just trolled, etc. Of course the site you invent would be of greater interest and ala

m to them, IMO...but

it is my understanding of the world and America as it now is that the true history of assassinations, secret government overthrows, dirty tricks, lies and deceptions to the public on matters that couldn't be any more important, wars, drug and arms deals and more - is as great a threat to them [if not as acute in the temporal sense] as their new boogymen of islamofascism which is mostly of their own making. In the long run, they are more afraid of the American People learning the truth and thus will devote [and HAVE devoted] enourmous amounts of persons, time, money and energy in the cover-up. The internet now allows the whole world to learn about what only a few dedicated researchers could exchange or publish in highly suppressed books.....it is a big threat to them. IMO This Forum more than many.....this part of the Forum...I think to think otherwise is naive in the extreme.

I'd go further. Some few who post here will also be having their phones monitored because of what they post here...and computer trojans sent to look inside their computers. Some of them were being monitored anyway because they are known to be active researchers putting their noses in places those who watch us would rather not looked at in the light. Sites like McAdams site is IMO a complete and knowing disinformation site to counter sites like this...that is another technique....there are others such as intelligence/cover-up books like Case Closed et al.....all methods are used. Some of the posters who just seem to have a 'different take' than those of us who know there was a conspiracy are just honestly in disagreement and working for no one [and that is fine and they are welcome]; AND A FEW are here to disrupt and thwart progress. Of those in the last catagory there may be some who do it out of their own misguided sense of patriotism and I'd be inclined to think a few are paid to. [iMO]

From a EU Report on SINGINT Eschelon:

54. Since the early 1990s, fast and sophisticated Comint systems have been developed to collect, filter and analyse the forms of fast digital communications used by the Internet. Because most of the world's Internet capacity lies within the United States or connects to the United States, many communications in "cyberspace" will pass through intermediate sites within the United States. Communications from Europe to and from Asia, Oceania, Africa or South America normally travel via the United States.

55. Routes taken by Internet "packets" depend on the origin and destination of the data, the systems through which they enter and leaves the Internet, and a myriad of other factors including time of day. Thus, routers within the western United States are at their most idle at the time when central European traffic is reaching peak usage. It is thus possible (and reasonable) for messages travelling a short distance in a busy European network to travel instead, for example, via Internet exchanges in California. It follows that a large proportion of international communications on the Internet will by the nature of the system pass through the United States and thus be readily accessible to NSA.

56.Standard Internet messages are composed of packets called "datagrams" . Datagrams include numbers representing both their origin and their destination, called "IP addresses". The addresses are unique to each computer connected to the Internet. They are inherently easy to identify as to country and site of origin and destination. Handling, sorting and routing millions of such packets each second is fundamental to the operation of major Internet centres. The same process facilitates extraction of traffic for Comint purposes.

57. Internet traffic can be accessed either from international communications links entering the United States, or when it reaches major Internet exchanges. Both methods have advantages. Access to communications systems is likely to be remain clandestine - whereas access to Internet exchanges might be more detectable but provides easier access to more data and simpler sorting methods. Although the quantities of data involved are immense, NSA is normally legally restricted to looking only at communications that start or finish in a foreign country. Unless special warrants are issued, all other data should normally be thrown away by machine before it can be examined or recorded.

58. Much other Internet traffic (whether foreign to the US or not) is of trivial intelligence interest or can be handled in other ways. For example, messages sent to "Usenet" discussion groups amounts to about 15 Gigabytes (GB) of data per day; the rough equivalent of 10,000 books. All this data is broadcast to anyone wanting (or willing) to have it. Like other Internet users, intelligence agencies have open source access to this data and store and analyse it. In the UK, the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency maintains a 1 Terabyte database containing the previous 90 days of Usenet messages.(35) A similar service, called "Deja News", is available to users of the World Wide Web (WWW). Messages for Usenet are readily distinguishable. It is pointless to collect them clandestinely.

59. Similar considerations affect the World Wide Web, most of which is openly accessible. Web sites are examined continuously by "search engines" which generate catalogues of their contents. "Alta Vista" and "Hotbot" are prominent public sites of this kind. NSA similarly employs computer "bots" (robots) to collect data of interest. For example, a New York web site known as JYA.COM (http://www.jya.com/crypto.htm) offers extensive public information on Sigint, Comint and cryptography. The site is frequently updated. Records of access to the site show that every morning it is visited by a "bot" from NSA's National Computer Security Centre, which looks for new files and makes copies of any that it finds.(36)

60. It follows that foreign Internet traffic of communications intelligence interest - consisting of e-mail, file transfers, "virtual private networks" operated over the internet, and some other messages - will form at best a few per cent of the traffic on most US Internet exchanges or backbone links. According to a former employee, NSA had by 1995 installed "sniffer" software to collect such traffic at nine major Internet exchange points (IXPs).(37) The first two such sites identified, FIX East and FIX West, are operated by US government agencies. They are closely linked to nearby commercial locations, MAE East and MAE West (see table). Three other sites listed were Network Access Points originally developed by the US National Science Foundation to provide the US Internet with its initial "backbone".

Impressive Peter.

My undertsanding of the NSA filtering approached what you have identified and cited.

I hadn't thought of the fact that This forum is from 'overseas' (conveniently forgotten?).

Maybe one individiual might come to mind, but I'm just not quite that paranoid (yet), but???

Thanks for the cites.

I need coffee now.

[Peter McKenna]

Impressive Peter.

My undertsanding of the NSA filtering approached what you have identified and cited.

I hadn't thought of the fact that This forum is from 'overseas' (conveniently forgotten?).

Maybe one individiual might come to mind, but I'm just not quite that paranoid (yet), but???

Thanks for the cites.

I need coffee now.

In fact it doesn't matter at all if the site, computer or phone is in USA or not now....the whole world is being montored now....I can prove that and the Bush Admin has even said so.....obliquely. Even the EU report sites as an example the NSA bot working on a NY site! And all the recent revelations of domestic phone filtering - not taps....filitering ALL phone calls in USA. 1984=2007

See my new post on 'Look at these sites at your own risk' Last URL has full text I extracted above from....and that is what is public...the real story [part I know, but will NOT put on internet!] is much worse...much worse...forget the coffee...you need a whiskey. The whole reality is sickening and out of control.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=10764&hl=

The early Postal Service (1776-1900) is probably one of the primary reasons that the United States was able to unify and survive the hardships of extreme isolation and frontier life.

The early Postal Service was, in many ways, similar to the onset of the World Wide Web.

Tampering or interfering with the mail has always been considered not only a criminal act, but a gross violation of personal privacy. The rules of etiquette demanded that personal letters be respected as a measure of a person's own private domain.

Although the parallels are not addressed much openly today, many feel that communications over the internet deserve the same measure of personal privacy that is given the mail. Barring an imminent threat to the country or people, mail is an extension of one's own home, and a reasonable expectation of privacy is manifest. More-so than communications via the telephone, which have also been provided the expectation of privacy tantamount to an extension of one's own home.

So why is the internet, the device of choice for interpersonal communication between so many, so exploited?

Some interesting items from the history of the US mail:

"Today it is difficult to envision the isolation that was the lot of farm families in early America. In the days before telephones, radios, or televisions were common, the farmer's main links to the outside world were the mail and the newspapers that came by mail to the nearest post office. Since the mail had to be picked up, this meant a trip to the post office, often involving a day's travel, round-trip. The farmer might delay picking up mail for days, weeks, or even months until the trip could be coupled with one for supplies, food, or equipment.

John Wanamaker of Pennsylvania was the first Postmaster General to advocate rural free delivery (RFD). Although funds were appropriated a month before he left office in 1893, subsequent Postmasters General dragged their feet on inaugurating the new service so that it was 1896 before the first experimental rural delivery routes began in West Virginia, with carriers working out of post offices in Charlestown, Halltown, and Uvilla.

Many transportation events in postal history were marked by great demonstrations: the Pony Express, for example, and scheduled airmail service in 1918. The West Virginia experiment with rural free delivery, however, was launched in relative obscurity and in an atmosphere of hostility. Critics of the plan claimed it was impractical and too expensive to have a postal carrier trudge over rutted roads and through forests trying to deliver mail in all kinds of weather.

However, the farmers, without exception, were delighted with the new service and the new world open to them. After receiving free delivery for a few months, one observed that it would take away part of life to give it up. A Missouri farmer looked back on his life and calculated that, in 15 years, he had traveled 12,000 miles going to and from his post office to get the mail.

A byproduct of rural free delivery was the stimulation it provided to the development of the great American system of roads and highways. A prerequisite for rural delivery was good roads. After hundreds of petitions for rural delivery were turned down by the Post Office because of unserviceable and inaccessible roads, responsible local governments began to extend and improve existing highways. Between 1897 and 1908, these local governments spent an estimated $72 million on bridges, culverts, and other improvements. In one county in Indiana, farmers themselves paid over $2,600 to grade and gravel a road in order to qualify for RFD.

The impact of RFD as a cultural and social agent for millions of Americans was even more striking, and, in this respect, rural delivery still is a vital link between industrial and rural America."

http://www.usps.com/history/his2.htm

THE SPIRIT OF THE PONY EXPRESS

"From the days of ancient Persia to dawn of modern industry, horse and rider served to bind together the provinces of monarchy, empire and republic. No state long survived its inability to promote the dissemination of knowledge and information among its people. In mid-century America, communication between St. Joseph on the fringe of western settlement and gold mining communities of California challenged the bold and made skeptical the timid. Into this picture rode the Pony Express. In rain and in snow, in sleet and in hail over moonlit prairie, down tortuous mountain path . . . pounding pony feet knitted together the ragged edges of a rising nation. From these hearty souls who toiled over plain and mountain that understanding might be more generally diffused, a nation spanning a continent was ours to inherit. In the spirit of the Pony Express it is for us to bequeath to those who shall follow, new trails in the sky uniting in thought and in deed."

- Frank S. Popplewell

"Ranked among the most remarkable feats to come out of the 1860 American West, the Pony Express was in service from April 1860 to November 1861. Its primary mission was to deliver mail and news between St. Joseph, Missouri, and San Francisco, California."

"The first mail by Pony Express reached Sacramento, April 13, 1860. At that time the company employed 300 person, 80 of them being riders whose average performance was about 75 miles. There is a record of one who rode 384 miles without stopping for meals and to change horses at stations. Prior to the advent of the Pony Express the newspapers had succeeded in having a telegraph wire run from San Francisco to Stockton and thence through the San Joaquin Valley and over the Tehachapi's to Los Angeles, the idea being to anticipate the arrival in San Francisco of the southern stage. But the endeavor failed to produce the improvements expected. The most news the local papers received through the Pony Express was their hair-breadth escapes from Indians and hold-up men. Buffalo Bill, Wild Bill Hickok and other of their calibre were among the riders."

Edited August 18, 2007 by Peter McKenna

[Peter McKenna]

Impressive Peter.

My undertsanding of the NSA filtering approached what you have identified and cited.

I hadn't thought of the fact that This forum is from 'overseas' (conveniently forgotten?).

Maybe one individiual might come to mind, but I'm just not quite that paranoid (yet), but???

Thanks for the cites.

I need coffee now.

In fact it doesn't matter at all if the site, computer or phone is in USA or not now....the whole world is being montored now....I can prove that and the Bush Admin has even said so.....obliquely. Even the EU report sites as an example the NSA bot working on a NY site! And all the recent revelations of domestic phone filtering - not taps....filitering ALL phone calls in USA. 1984=2007

See my new post on 'Look at these sites at your own risk' Last URL has full text I extracted above from....and that is what is public...the real story [part I know, but will NOT put on internet!] is much worse...much worse...forget the coffee...you need a whiskey. The whole reality is sickening and out of control.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=10764&hl=

The early Postal Service (1776-1900) is probably one of the primary reasons that the United States was able to unify and survive the hardships of extreme isolation and frontier life.

The early Postal Service was, in many ways, similar to the onset of the World Wide Web.

Tampering or interfering with the mail has always been considered not only a criminal act, but a gross violation of personal privacy. The rules of etiquette demanded that personal letters be respected as a measure of a person's own private domain.

Although the parallels are not addressed much openly today, many feel that communications over the internet deserve the same measure of personal privacy that is given the mail. Barring an imminent threat to the country or people, mail is an extension of one's own home, and a reasonable expectation of privacy is manifest. More-so than communications via the telephone, which have also been provided the expectation of privacy tantamount to an extension of one's own home.

So why is the internet, the device of choice for interpersonal communication between so many, so exploited?

Some interesting items from the history of the US mail:

"Today it is difficult to envision the isolation that was the lot of farm families in early America. In the days before telephones, radios, or televisions were common, the farmer's main links to the outside world were the mail and the newspapers that came by mail to the nearest post office. Since the mail had to be picked up, this meant a trip to the post office, often involving a day's travel, round-trip. The farmer might delay picking up mail for days, weeks, or even months until the trip could be coupled with one for supplies, food, or equipment.

John Wanamaker of Pennsylvania was the first Postmaster General to advocate rural free delivery (RFD). Although funds were appropriated a month before he left office in 1893, subsequent Postmasters General dragged their feet on inaugurating the new service so that it was 1896 before the first experimental rural delivery routes began in West Virginia, with carriers working out of post offices in Charlestown, Halltown, and Uvilla.

Many transportation events in postal history were marked by great demonstrations: the Pony Express, for example, and scheduled airmail service in 1918. The West Virginia experiment with rural free delivery, however, was launched in relative obscurity and in an atmosphere of hostility. Critics of the plan claimed it was impractical and too expensive to have a postal carrier trudge over rutted roads and through forests trying to deliver mail in all kinds of weather.

However, the farmers, without exception, were delighted with the new service and the new world open to them. After receiving free delivery for a few months, one observed that it would take away part of life to give it up. A Missouri farmer looked back on his life and calculated that, in 15 years, he had traveled 12,000 miles going to and from his post office to get the mail.

A byproduct of rural free delivery was the stimulation it provided to the development of the great American system of roads and highways. A prerequisite for rural delivery was good roads. After hundreds of petitions for rural delivery were turned down by the Post Office because of unserviceable and inaccessible roads, responsible local governments began to extend and improve existing highways. Between 1897 and 1908, these local governments spent an estimated $72 million on bridges, culverts, and other improvements. In one county in Indiana, farmers themselves paid over $2,600 to grade and gravel a road in order to qualify for RFD.

The impact of RFD as a cultural and social agent for millions of Americans was even more striking, and, in this respect, rural delivery still is a vital link between industrial and rural America."

http://www.usps.com/history/his2.htm

THE SPIRIT OF THE PONY EXPRESS

"From the days of ancient Persia to dawn of modern industry, horse and rider served to bind together the provinces of monarchy, empire and republic. No state long survived its inability to promote the dissemination of knowledge and information among its people. In mid-century America, communication between St. Joseph on the fringe of western settlement and gold mining communities of California challenged the bold and made skeptical the timid. Into this picture rode the Pony Express. In rain and in snow, in sleet and in hail over moonlit prairie, down tortuous mountain path . . . pounding pony feet knitted together the ragged edges of a rising nation. From these hearty souls who toiled over plain and mountain that understanding might be more generally diffused, a nation spanning a continent was ours to inherit. In the spirit of the Pony Express it is for us to bequeath to those who shall follow, new trails in the sky uniting in thought and in deed."

- Frank S. Popplewell

"Ranked among the most remarkable feats to come out of the 1860 American West, the Pony Express was in service from April 1860 to November 1861. Its primary mission was to deliver mail and news between St. Joseph, Missouri, and San Francisco, California."

"The first mail by Pony Express reached Sacramento, April 13, 1860. At that time the company employed 300 person, 80 of them being riders whose average performance was about 75 miles. There is a record of one who rode 384 miles without stopping for meals and to change horses at stations. Prior to the advent of the Pony Express the newspapers had succeeded in having a telegraph wire run from San Francisco to Stockton and thence through the San Joaquin Valley and over the Tehachapi's to Los Angeles, the idea being to anticipate the arrival in San Francisco of the southern stage. But the endeavor failed to produce the improvements expected. The most news the local papers received through the Pony Express was their hair-breadth escapes from Indians and hold-up men. Buffalo Bill, Wild Bill Hickok and other of their calibre were among the riders."

http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/c...lreportIIIh.htm

Put that in your Pony Express bag........

From your own reference site:

"The legal fears of CIA and FBI officials were firmly based, for sanctity of the mail has been a long-established principle in American jurisprudence. Fourth Amendment restrictions on first class mail opening were recognized as early as 1878, when the Supreme Court wrote in Ex Parte Jackson, 96 U.S. 727,733 (1878):

Letters and sealed packages of this kind in the mail are as fully guarded from examination and inspection, except as to their outward form and weight, as if they were retained by the parties forwarding them in their own domiciles. The constitutional guaranty of the right of the people to be secure in their papers against unreasonable searches and seizures extends to their papers, thus closed against inspection, wherever they may be. Whilst in the mail, they can only be opened and examined under like warrant, issued upon similar oath or affirmation, particularly describing the thing to be seized, as is required when papers are subjected to search in one's own household. No law of Congress can place in the hands of officials connected with the postal service any authority to invade the secrecy of letters and such sealed packages in the mail; and all regulations adopted as to mail matter of this kind must be in subordination to the great principle embodied in the fourth amendment of the Constitution."

Very sad indeed.....

[Peter McKenna]

Peter McKenna's post (#69) is excellent, full of information and well presented. One of the points is how many resources are available for "government agents" to monitor so much of what seems vast on the web? COINTELPROs against the Klan and Martin Luther King, Jr. involved informant types, but much of the disruptive stuff was in the form of anonymous letters/packages in the mail. These types of indirect pressures would be more what a security service would be able to conduct depending on number of agents available. To monitor the web, the numbers would have to be huge, which sounds unrealistic.

Kevin West's response was good. He was right to criticize my simplistic "stupid or dishonest" assertion. In fact, "stupid" was too harsh and unfair. It deserved criticism, as it was produced on the spur of the moment in reaction to some things I'd just read. Always a bad idea to post anything immediately around here. I apologize for my own stupidity in making an either/or assertion. And no, Kevin, I'm not interested in getting into yet another online forum fight........it's way too time-consuming considering how often it takes to keep logging in just to post anything

Thank you Daniel,

Peter Lemkin's posts expanded with great detail (and by way of citations) the likely extent of Web exploitation. While I am somewhat reserved in my feelings still, Peter presents a compelling argument (and somewhat frighteneing).

I still don't belive that disnformists populate this site. But, the intrusion into our thoughts and words (and privacy) by the government is noteworthy. 'I maybe paranoid but that doesn't mean I'm wrong'.