Are you protesting Obama on Facebook, Twitter? Watch out. White House wants to know

[qh4dotcom]

Not being nice to Obama and saying mean things about him on Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc? Watch out

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/09/red-alert-white-house-plans-massive.html

1st amendment under attack again

[Yieu]

This is a serious accusation, but it is made on a blog. Is there a better source?

[qh4dotcom]

This is a serious accusation, but it is made on a blog. Is there a better source?

If it is true, you'll probably hear Fox news talk about it soon...this was posted yesterday.

[Yieu]

Well, I hope it shows up on better sources or is proven false (which would be best), rather than quietly disappears but turns out to be true after the fact.

[gls]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53363

[Reason]

If you actually read it, it is talking about recording comments and messages that are posted on or sent to the white house accounts.

[InterestedParticipant]

This is a serious accusation, but it is made on a blog. Is there a better source?
Of course they are harvesting personal data from social networking sites. I don't need a blog post to tell me about this, especially when we are talking about FACEBOOK, Twitter & Google (Youtube). I mean, who do you think funded these companies?

[BlackTerrel]

Do you ever stop to think? For one second?

There are 150 million + Americans on websites such as a Facebook, MySpace, Twitter etc... why wouldn't you use it to gauge public opinion? Companies and celebrities do it too. The music industry monitors what people say about their artists - it's common sense. It doesn't mean they're going to come get you. Do you really think Jessica Simpson is going to come to your door and drag you out (not that any of us would complain).

[DapperDan]

Sure I would stop to think that but do you honestly believe the government would just stop at gauging public opinion and not go further? No. This is OUR government we're talking about here.

[BlackTerrel]

Sure I would stop to think that but do you honestly believe the government would just stop at gauging public opinion and not go further? No. This is OUR government we're talking about here.

What exactly do you think is going to happen? There are 150 million + Americans on these networks, anything anti-Obama would be in the tens of millions of users.

What's more likely/feasible?

#1 "Mr. President 40 million people on Facebook are opposed to your policy X for such and such reason, let's change the message".

#2 "Mr. President 40 million people on Facebook are opposed to your policy X for such and such reason, let's round them all up and put them in camps".

There are legitimate arguments against Obama and his policies. These paranoid "they're coming to get you" threads detract from that message.

[qh4dotcom]

What exactly do you think is going to happen? There are 150 million + Americans on these networks, anything anti-Obama would be in the tens of millions of users.

What's more likely/feasible?

#1 "Mr. President 40 million people on Facebook are opposed to your policy X for such and such reason, let's change the message".

#2 "Mr. President 40 million people on Facebook are opposed to your policy X for such and such reason, let's round them all up and put them in camps".

There are legitimate arguments against Obama and his policies. These paranoid "they're coming to get you" threads detract from that message.

You don't have to round up all 40 million of them...only the ones that hate Obama the most.

[Bruno]

Do you ever stop to think? For one second?

There are 150 million + Americans on websites such as a Facebook, MySpace, Twitter etc... why wouldn't you use it to gauge public opinion? Companies and celebrities do it too. The music industry monitors what people say about their artists - it's common sense. It doesn't mean they're going to come get you. Do you really think Jessica Simpson is going to come to your door and drag you out (not that any of us would complain).

You seem pretty trusting for someone who posted about being pulled aside numerous times recently by police asking to show your ID.

I hope Jessica Simpson comes to my door, but it is not her that I have concerns about.

Would you have felt differently if Bush had been collecting the same material, along with email lists of people who did not support his policies?

[InterestedParticipant]

Do you ever stop to think? For one second?

There are 150 million + Americans on websites such as a Facebook, MySpace, Twitter etc... why wouldn't you use it to gauge public opinion? Companies and celebrities do it too. The music industry monitors what people say about their artists - it's common sense. It doesn't mean they're going to come get you. Do you really think Jessica Simpson is going to come to your door and drag you out (not that any of us would complain).
Does anyone here believe that a Harvard Psych-major, who dropped out, started and built this company (Facebook)?

Social Networking for the Web was being vigorously discussed in 2000, it's based on network centric philosophies developed by the Pentagon years earlier. None of the early sites or early experts got exposure like Facebook, and therefore none received any tangible market penetration. So, why does some punk dropout come out years later to dominate the market?

Also, the early experts were talking about social networking sites that provided network users with real value, real organizing ability, not some data collection front end like Facebook is? So, why were all the better mousetraps pushed to the wayside while all the big boy VC's funded this snot nosed kid?

[BlackTerrel]

You don't have to round up all 40 million of them...only the ones that hate Obama the most.

So I write on my facebook status message "I hate Obama" I get a knock on the door from the FBI? Really?

Sure that could happen if you make death threats, but that's something else entirely.


You seem pretty trusting for someone who posted about being pulled aside numerous times recently by police asking to show your ID.

I hope Jessica Simpson comes to my door, but it is not her that I have concerns about.

Would you have felt differently if Bush had been collecting the same material, along with email lists of people who did not support his policies?

If you're in the public eye and you care about public opinion you would have to be an idiot not to monitor these social networks. So I would imagine that Bush did it as well. Then again he may meet the criteria of idiot.

As far as me being pulled over by the cops, there are asshole cops, always have been. Difference between that and being put in a camp because I don't like the President.

[BlackTerrel]

Does anyone here believe that a Harvard Psych-major, who dropped out, started and built this company (Facebook)?

Social Networking for the Web was being vigorously discussed in 2000, it's based on network centric philosophies developed by the Pentagon years earlier. None of the early sites or early experts got exposure like Facebook, and therefore none received any tangible market penetration. So, why does some punk dropout come out years later to dominate the market?

Kind of like Bill Gates started Microsoft. Do you know anything about Facebook or how it grew? I live in Palo Alto, I know tons of people that work there. FB's growth was organic - they started at the college level, which was very unique and exclusive at the time. That's how they became big. They didn't get much media or attention until they were already quite large.

The funny thing is that living in this area - techie's love Ron Paul, more than any other group I've met. His support among Google, YouTube, Facebook etc. employees is pretty high, not 50% but more so than among the general population. I don't understand why people on this board don't like these companies.

[InterestedParticipant]

Kind of like Bill Gates started Microsoft. Do you know anything about Facebook or how it grew? I live in Palo Alto, I know tons of people that work there. FB's growth was organic - they started at the college level, which was very unique and exclusive at the time. That's how they became big. They didn't get much media or attention until they were already quite large.

The funny thing is that living in this area - techie's love Ron Paul, more than any other group I've met. His support among Google, YouTube, Facebook etc. employees is pretty high, not 50% but more so than among the general population. I don't understand why people on this board don't like these companies.
The employees don't understand what is going on, as they're too much into their work and too busy trying to be "Googley."

Gotta look at the VC's that back these companies and the executive teams that are put in place... lots of CFR, Aspen Institute, etc. types. The guys that run the VC's get their funding from Wall Street and the top guys at the VC's spend as much time in DC, getting orders, as they do in the Valley dishing them orders out. It all comes from the top down, from DC. The punks they put in the media are nothing more than fronts for the public.

These companies are not infiltrated by these people, they are created by them. Just look at how they passed all the intel (windows GUI, Mouse, networking) from XEROX Parc & SRI to Jobs & Gates. It's military industrial complex with a sophisticated front end to make it look legit. Add a bunch of geeked-out MIT types who've never challenged authority and unlimited funding, and you got yourself a global technological empire.

But to your point about them being RP supporters. Yes, that is certainly true. Unfortunately, they also run to go listen to Kissinger speak at a Google Talks event run by Schmidt.... so they're a tightly controlled bunch that aren't about to give up 6-figure salaries, Nerf basketball, and frequent pats on the back and stroking of egos in exchange for confronting the same system that they are intimately helping to build.

More of them should read Bill Joy's "Why the Future doesn't need us," or Jacques Elluls "The Technological Society." Maybe then, people will reconsider what they are doing and exercise some soul searching.

[qh4dotcom]

Bump

[devil21]

If you actually read it, it is talking about recording comments and messages that are posted on or sent to the white house accounts.

Where do you see that? I don't see anything of that sort of disclosure. Quote? Source?

[BlackTerrel]

The employees don't understand what is going on, as they're too much into their work and too busy trying to be "Googley."

Gotta look at the VC's that back these companies and the executive teams that are put in place... lots of CFR, Aspen Institute, etc. types. The guys that run the VC's get their funding from Wall Street and the top guys at the VC's spend as much time in DC, getting orders, as they do in the Valley dishing them orders out. It all comes from the top down, from DC. The punks they put in the media are nothing more than fronts for the public.

How do you know all this? Who are the CFR types at Facebook?

I am obsessed with FB and know it quite well. Know a lot of people who work there, including pretty high up and trying to score a job there myself.

[revolutionary8]

How do you know all this? Who are the CFR types at Facebook?

I am obsessed with FB and know it quite well. Know a lot of people who work there, including pretty high up and trying to score a job there myself.
Now we know.

[InterestedParticipant]

How do you know all this? Who are the CFR types at Facebook?

I am obsessed with FB and know it quite well. Know a lot of people who work there, including pretty high up and trying to score a job there myself.
I listen very closely to the "movers & shakers," the real ones, the ones not [really] in the public eye. I've connected lots of dots over lots of years, and I never ever buy into the hype and I keep a wide-open mind.

The CFR types that I recall researching were/are at Google. But if you get up to speed on the DoD's Network Centric Operational philosophies, and then tie that in with law enforcement techniques for forensic triangulation, it will really open your eyes up to FB's longterm purpose in life.... kinda ties in well with Rapleaf (very evil company).

If you're living in the Valley, then it's going to be real hard [almost impossible] to extract yourself from the social, cultural bubble that's been created there, especially if you are simultaneously trying to get a gig at FB and have to play-along... that's a hard dual-life to successfully pull off. Ever seen Invasion of the Body Snatchers (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077745/)with Donald Sutherland....well, that's about what your up against.

YouTube - Invasion of the Body Snatchers [1978] - Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTSR6bu0Nq0)

[BlackTerrel]

Now we know.

Are you scared of me now?

It's a fascinating company both from a business perspective and a cultural one. And the Liberty movement would do well to harness its power, rather than fear it.

[InterestedParticipant]

Are you scared of me now?

It's a fascinating company both from a business perspective and a cultural one. And the Liberty movement would do well to harness its power, rather than fear it.
The best thing the Liberty movement can do is crush these systems of control created by the military industrial complex using Silicon Valley as the front vehicle.

If you're trying to get a gig at FB, then you understand social systems, correct? What kinda of data mining do you think these guys are doing, and how do you think these can be used as part of a larger feedback control system?

[devil21]

Tax offices are already jumping on sites like Facebook and Twitter to squeeze every last dime they can from citizens.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125132627009861985.html

[revolutionary8]

I am obsessed with facebook. Are you scared of me now?

It's a fascinating company both from a business perspective and a cultural one. And the Liberty movement would do well to harness its power, rather than fear it.

Ummmm no, not scared, and I don't "fear" facebook, I am just not stupid enough to create a personal account...

I'll start here-


Apparently it’s not only the IRS using social media to find its targets, but burglars as well.

Michael Fraser, a “reformed burglar” working for the BBC (perhaps one of the more interesting job titles out there) calls it “Internet shopping for burglars.” The combination of a willingness to “friend” total strangers and open broadcasting about one’s holiday plans, whereabouts, purchases, home interiors and other personal information essentially creates a field day for professional burglars. In fact, we reported on just such an incident back in June.


The concept is backed up by recent statistics from British insurance and investment management firm Legal & General, whose survey found nearly 40% of social networking users share holiday plans on sites like Facebook and Twitter. They also found about 13% of Facebook users and 92% of Twitter users tend to accept friend requests or follows without checking up on the source.

and


(CNN) -- Without his input, Bryan Rutberg's Facebook status update -- the way friends track each other -- suddenly changed on January 21 to this frightening alert:

Fears of impostors are increasing as Facebook's membership grows.

"Bryan NEEDS HELP URGENTLY!!!"

His online friends saw the message and came to his aid. Some posted concerned messages on his public profile -- "What's happening????? What do you need?" one wrote. Another friend, Beny Rubinstein, got a direct message saying Rutberg had been robbed at gunpoint in London and needed money to get back to the United States.

So, trying to be a good friend, Rubinstein wired $1,143 to London in two installments, according to police in Bellevue, Washington.

Meanwhile, Rutberg was safe at home in Seattle.

Oh, and I am sure you have heard about the ins. companies that are wanting to charge more to those who have facebook accts? A ploy? Absolutely. Grounded in truth? Absolutely. Can ya blame em? Debatable.

I'll skip the part about Gov't intelligence (NSA, DHS, etc) using facebook for tracking purposes...

I have a phone, a car, I can ride on planes, I can use a pen and paper and email. I'm all good buddy. I understand the benefits, but I sure as heck don't need it (privately) and don't want it (personaly). I am sure not "obsessed" with it. Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, etc etc- much much different... but I see no need from a personal standpoint. What I mean by "personal" are these ding dongs that post every time they take a shit or fart...

It's pretty condescending, as well as pomp ass to assume that I "fear" you or face book, dontcha think?
nawwwwwwww....


And one more thing---->
where the hell do you get off accusing RON PAUL PEOPLE of not utilizing the intrawebs and being "skeered" of 'them'?????

IMO- it is the intrawebs that is one of our biggest downfalls- people tend to stay on line rather than get out and ACT.

Terrel- perhaps you are "picking a battle" because you are personaly "obsessed"?

I know I am guilty of it. Feel sorry for me. lol (hey man, at least I can see my own "projection" lol)
Just a thought.

If ya think about it, a ton of books and videos and new age stuff goes on and on about "projection" when it is as simple as this: If you haven't seen it or felt it, you most likely will not recognize it" :)
That saying, "we've all been there" isn't really a cliche' after all, or is it the language itself that is deceptive rather than the feeling? I'll bank on it being the language that is deceptive.

[BlackTerrel]

Apparently it’s not only the IRS using social media to find its targets, but burglars as well.

Michael Fraser, a “reformed burglar” working for the BBC (perhaps one of the more interesting job titles out there) calls it “Internet shopping for burglars.” The combination of a willingness to “friend” total strangers and open broadcasting about one’s holiday plans, whereabouts, purchases, home interiors and other personal information essentially creates a field day for professional burglars. In fact, we reported on just such an incident back in June.

You can have a facebook account and not be a total idiot. That should keep you safe from burglars.

You don't need an account. But there's a lot of value to having one.

[Cowlesy]

Are you scared of me now?

It's a fascinating company both from a business perspective and a cultural one. And the Liberty movement would do well to harness its power, rather than fear it.

Don't be a little bitch, Terrel. You know what circles the freedom movement occasionally picks up users, and that is the freedom-i-don't-want-gov't-in-my-shit circles.

You know that, and you should deal with it.

In the end which 98% of us think will never happen, "those" guys will be the ones that save your ass.

[BlackTerrel]

Don't be a little bitch, Terrel. You know what circles the freedom movement occasionally picks up users, and that is the freedom-i-don't-want-gov't-in-my-shit circles.

You know that, and you should deal with it.

In the end which 98% of us think will never happen, "those" guys will be the ones that save your ass.

I'm not sure what Facebook is doing wrong. It's a place for people to congregate and share photos and information with friends.

There's a lot of animosity to companies like Google and Facebook here and I don't get it. Do you remember how shitty search was before Google came out, how much harder it was to get information?

[InterestedParticipant]

I'm not sure what Facebook is doing wrong. It's a place for people to congregate and share photos and information with friends.
Are you kidding me?


There's a lot of animosity to companies like Google and Facebook here and I don't get it. Do you remember how shitty search was before Google came out, how much harder it was to get information?
Just look at this presentation on the future of social networking, they're developing complex profiles on each of us (see image), and they are developing economic models based upon how much influence we have and the size of the sphere of influence (see full presentation (http://www.slideshare.net/charleneli/the-future-of-social-networks?src=embed)).

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/3623/mysocialgraphsm.jpg

But most importantly, to evaluate these companies in a vacuum without understanding their sources of funding is to not understand who is really behind these companies and why.

[BlackTerrel]

Are you kidding me? Just look at this presentation on the future of social networking, they're developing complex profiles on each of us (see image), and they are developing economic models based upon how much influence we have and the size of the sphere of influence

It's called capitalism. You provide FB information, they use that information to target ads. You don't like it don't join Facebook. What's your solution... outlawing social networking sites?


But most importantly, to evaluate these companies in a vacuum without understanding their sources of funding is to not understand who is really behind these companies and why.

Yeah you've said that but you haven't given any information about it.

As I said do you remember how shitty search was before google came around. Information is much easier to find now than it was 5 years ago.

[devil21]

It's called capitalism. You provide FB information, they use that information to target ads. You don't like it don't join Facebook. What's your solution... outlawing social networking sites?

The problem is that these social networking sites cooperate freely and openly with elements that do not have the user's best interests at heart. In other words, they work against their very revenue generating sources. If you truly think all Facebook does is "target ads" then I doubt you know as much about the company as you claim. This applies to FB, Myspace, Twitter and others. They are giant databases that hand over whatever information is asked of them. Myspace and Google have even come out on record that they don't even require legal subpoenas.



Yeah you've said that but you haven't given any information about it.

As I said do you remember how shitty search was before google came around. Information is much easier to find now than it was 5 years ago.

Nothing in this world is free. Sure, the average joe gets better search results today. The average joe also has agreed to share everything he does with fed.gov by doing that searching. Last I checked, Google didn't make me acknowledge this before allowing me to use their product.

[Bruno]

The problem is that these social networking sites cooperate freely and openly with elements that do not have the user's best interests at heart. In other words, they work against their very revenue generating sources. If you truly think all Facebook does is "target ads" then I doubt you know as much about the company as you claim. This applies to FB, Myspace, Twitter and others. They are giant databases that hand over whatever information is asked of them. Myspace and Google have even come out of record that they don't even require legal subpoenas.



Nothing in this world is free. Sure, the average joe gets better search results today. The average joe also has agreed to share everything he does with fed.gov by doing that searching. Last I checked, Google didn't make me acknowledge this before allowing me to use their product.

Just saw an article the other day about ChildWatch software that was selling the information to firms to help with market research. They were actually scrubbing emails, chats, etc that children had produced, and selling the data to outside companies.

[BlackTerrel]

The problem is that these social networking sites cooperate freely and openly with elements that do not have the user's best interests at heart. In other words, they work against their very revenue generating sources. If you truly think all Facebook does is "target ads" then I doubt you know as much about the company as you claim. This applies to FB, Myspace, Twitter and others. They are giant databases that hand over whatever information is asked of them. Myspace and Google have even come out on record that they don't even require legal subpoenas.

It depends on what is asked. What do you think FB is handing over to the government? And what can the government do about it?

As I said someone posts a threat against Obama online I believe there will be consequences. Whether it's on RPF or Facebook. Someone says "Obama sucks" I don't think they have the resources or the will to do anything about it.

[devil21]

It depends on what is asked. What do you think FB is handing over to the government? And what can the government do about it?

As I said someone posts a threat against Obama online I believe there will be consequences. Whether it's on RPF or Facebook. Someone says "Obama sucks" I don't think they have the resources or the will to do anything about it.

Does it really depend on what is asked? I beg to differ. First, any and all of these social networking sites should be working to PROTECT their users from invasions of privacy instead of serving them up on a platter to whichever goon with a badge happens to ask. Do you not think cops can and will use their authority and access to get info for personal and/or illegal reasons? I know they do because I was involved with one several years ago that used his "authoritah" to collect private information about people for personal reasons, outside of any legal investigation. This is why subpoenas and warrants should be enforced before any info is turned over. Keep in mind that Im not just talking about info on the user's profile that anyone can see. Im talking moreso about the "private" info. Names, IP info, whatever. What LEO chooses to pursue is beside the point. The Bill of Rights applies to social networking sites. The operators of those sites choose to ignore them in order to be "friendly" with fed.gov.

[BlackTerrel]

Does it really depend on what is asked? I beg to differ. First, any and all of these social networking sites should be working to PROTECT their users from invasions of privacy instead of serving them up on a platter to whichever goon with a badge happens to ask. Do you not think cops can and will use their authority and access to get info for personal and/or illegal reasons? I know they do because I was involved with one several years ago that used his "authoritah" to collect private information about people for personal reasons, outside of any legal investigation. This is why subpoenas and warrants should be enforced before any info is turned over. Keep in mind that Im not just talking about info on the user's profile that anyone can see. Im talking moreso about the "private" info. Names, IP info, whatever. What LEO chooses to pursue is beside the point. The Bill of Rights applies to social networking sites. The operators of those sites choose to ignore them in order to be "friendly" with fed.gov.

I'd like to see specific examples of what was handed over and in what context. If a guy is hitting on an underage girl "dateline NBC I'm Chris Hansen" then I want that info turned over. If someone makes threats against the life of the President of the United States I want that info turned over.

If someone says "Obama is a ***" and the secret service comes knocking then that's another matter entirely. That's what this is about - the thread is stating (or strongly implying) that people who criticize Obama on Facebook are going to be hounded by the federal government. It's a strong accusation - I want some evidence before I get outraged.

[devil21]

I'd like to see specific examples of what was handed over and in what context. If a guy is hitting on an underage girl "dateline NBC I'm Chris Hansen" then I want that info turned over. If someone makes threats against the life of the President of the United States I want that info turned over.

Of course evidence of actual crimes should be turned over. BUT it should be turned over through due process of law as required by the Constitution. Oh, and it should be an actual crime. Speaking out against Obama's agenda is not a crime.



If someone says "Obama is a ***" and the secret service comes knocking then that's another matter entirely. That's what this is about - the thread is stating (or strongly implying) that people who criticize Obama on Facebook are going to be hounded by the federal government. It's a strong accusation - I want some evidence before I get outraged.

So the potential for harrassment for exercising the First Amendment isn't enough for you? Let's remember that the WH already took Stasi-like steps with flag@whitehouse.gov. You outraged? LOL ok. You already admitted in the thread that you worship Facebook. Somehow I doubt any argument made would be enough to outrage you.

[devil21]

How timely.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=209439

[BlackTerrel]

Of course evidence of actual crimes should be turned over. BUT it should be turned over through due process of law as required by the Constitution. Oh, and it should be an actual crime. Speaking out against Obama's agenda is not a crime.

Can you give specific examples of information that Facebook has turned over to the government without due process? I can't comment unless I know what they are actually being accused of.


So the potential for harrassment for exercising the First Amendment isn't enough for you? Let's remember that the WH already took Stasi-like steps with flag@whitehouse.gov. You outraged? LOL ok. You already admitted in the thread that you worship Facebook. Somehow I doubt any argument made would be enough to outrage you.

I worship God, not Facebook. I look at FB the same way I looked at the internet in the late 90's. It has the potential to change the world in a positive way but also in a negative way - but it's kind of inevitable. Once the genie is out of the bottle it never goes back in. The internet is here to stay and social networking is here to stay.

[devil21]

Can you give specific examples of information that Facebook has turned over to the government without due process? I can't comment unless I know what they are actually being accused of.

You can't be serious. We both well know that FB doesn't publish a public monthly report of all the people which they turned data over to the police.

"Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence."

Your request for "proof" is a cop out. Or do you really believe that FB and other social networking sites have never turned over info at the request of LEO? Somehow I doubt that if Myspace and Google both openly admit to providing personal info without subpoenas and warrants then the other sites would be less cooperative. Ill concede that I do not know FB's stated privacy policy since I don't use the service. Maybe they'll surprise me......*holding breath*.

[InterestedParticipant]

It's called capitalism. You provide FB information, they use that information to target ads. You don't like it don't join Facebook. What's your solution... outlawing social networking sites?


As I said do you remember how shitty search was before google came around. Information is much easier to find now than it was 5 years ago.
What you don't see is the fascism, dude. You're under the spell of Silicon Valley.

I keep telling you to look to the core startup investors to these company's, but you don't seem to care. Where are these guys getting their marching orders, what is the source of that originating funding?

What you will find is it is all coordinated from the top, in DC. All these big VC boys are just errand boyz and mouthpieces. But you won't believe me until you find out for yourself.

So, you have a choice, keep drinking the Silicon Valley kool-aid and be the NWO's beatch while you help them develop their new feedback control tools, or do some homework and burst your own bubble.

Choose Brother, Choose!