PDA

View Full Version : Department Of Defense Breaks Into C-span Signal During Ron Paul Interview




kenc9
10-19-2007, 02:26 PM
Did this happen or did someone make this video like this? Strange

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMY1f8T4a9w

kaligula
10-19-2007, 02:30 PM
It was in the broadcast. C-SPan technical glitch...

kenc9
10-19-2007, 02:34 PM
It was in the broadcast. C-SPan technical glitch...

With two mins left on the counter the defense breaks in and has a high noise tone with their name on the screen. Very weird

Lord Xar
10-19-2007, 02:35 PM
oh, you mean the same "glitch" that happened at the last debate? Pretty odd they always seem to be happening when ron paul is speaking..

Phil M
10-19-2007, 02:39 PM
I'd like a show of hands: who actually believes that the Department of Defense is willing to interrupt a broadcast of Ron Paul on C-SPAN because they're afraid of him? I mean, frigging C-SPAN? Who watches it other than political junkies who already know about Ron Paul? I am getting really annoyed by the tinfoil-hatedness of some people.

devil21
10-19-2007, 02:41 PM
Its a conspiracy! A local Amber Alert broke into RP's speech today at the Value Voters summit! Those damn kidnappers are always trying to hold Ron down!

</sarcasm>

kenc9
10-19-2007, 02:42 PM
I'd like a show of hands: who actually believes that the Department of Defense is willing to interrupt a broadcast of Ron Paul on C-SPAN because they're afraid of him? I mean, frigging C-SPAN? Who watches it other than political junkies who already know about Ron Paul? I am getting really annoyed by the tinfoil-hatedness of some people.

Nothing tinfoil about it, I have watched alo of vids and live political talks but I never saw that before. How is it even possible to have a non C-span military commercial?

foofighter20x
10-19-2007, 02:45 PM
I'd like a show of hands: who actually believes that the Department of Defense is willing to interrupt a broadcast of Ron Paul on C-SPAN because they're afraid of him? I mean, frigging C-SPAN? Who watches it other than political junkies who already know about Ron Paul? I am getting really annoyed by the tinfoil-hatedness of some people.

Remember that military members are human (speaking from personal knowledge here, as I'm human and military).

Most humans are prone to partisanship and abuses of authority, and some are willing to do what they are told without much questioning (see the Milgram Experiment).

It's unlikely, but not out of the question.

Also, the government has a switch on every television/radio broadcast instrument in the country (for the Emergency Broadcast system). All they have to do is hit a switch and they are broadcasting on every TV and radio in the U.S.

kenc9
10-19-2007, 02:50 PM
Here was the screen shot,
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y109/kenc9/RPDOD.jpg

Phil M
10-19-2007, 02:50 PM
Nothing tinfoil about it, I have watched alo of vids and live political talks but I never saw that before. How is it even possible to have a non C-span military commercial?

But just because it cannot be explained doesn't mean that we should jump to conclusions. Consider what motives have to be involved: the DoD has to be tracking Ron Paul, see that he is appearing on C-SPAN, decide to interrupt the broadcast for thirty seconds even though that won't really do anything to disrupt his campaign, and ignore every other of his media appearances until today. If that's the best the "NWO global elitists" can do, I am not impressed. If that's all we're dealing with, we should be very relieved.

kenc9
10-19-2007, 02:53 PM
But just because it cannot be explained doesn't mean that we should jump to conclusions. Consider what motives have to be involved: the DoD has to be tracking Ron Paul, see that he is appearing on C-SPAN, decide to interrupt the broadcast for thirty seconds even though that won't really do anything to disrupt his campaign, and ignore every other of his media appearances until today. If that's the best the "NWO global elitists" can do, I am not impressed. If that's all we're dealing with, we should be very relieved.

You are the only one jumping to anything, I only showed what happened.

Look at the screen shot above...you explain it.

Johnnybags
10-19-2007, 02:59 PM
You are the only one jumping to anything, I only showed what happened.

Look at the screen shot above...you explain it.

some things are coincidental but take my word for it, every line ever written on this board is databased somewhere where the FEDS can locate it. You are naive if you think otherwise. We live in a plutocracy where they are as afraid of foreign as much as domestic unrest.

Phil M
10-19-2007, 03:02 PM
You are the only one jumping to anything, I only showed what happened.

Look at the screen shot above...you explain it.

From the evidence provided it seems that the DoD was informing us it was having a press briefing. A bit odd way of doing it, yes, but not the strangest thing I've ever seen. I would just like an explanation of what would motivate them to do this. If they were honestly out to get Ron Paul, I'm sure they could think of better ways to undermine him (though then again, this is the federal government we're dealing with).

fj45lvr
10-19-2007, 03:03 PM
some things are coincidental but take my word for it, every line ever written on this board is databased somewhere where the FEDS can locate it. You are naive if you think otherwise. We live in a plutocracy where they are as afraid of foreign as much as domestic unrest.

that seems so so paranoid....I have a hard time believing that big brother is scouring the whole internet to record every word out there.....it would be real shocking if true.

thomj76
10-19-2007, 03:08 PM
In my opinion, later on that day, there was going to be a briefing. Someone at C-Span hit the wrong button, and it showed the feedline before there were cameras rolling. As a result, the electronic placard was in place to signify which feedline it was to (the DOD signal for the later press coverage), and not the camera shot.

That's the way I see it.

Someone in the AV Department was probably later admonished and given the punishment of having to watch paint dry.

;)

unklejman
10-19-2007, 03:11 PM
that seems so so paranoid....I have a hard time believing that big brother is scouring the whole internet to record every word out there.....it would be real shocking if true.

It would be wouldn't it?

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=515477

wgadget
10-19-2007, 03:15 PM
I watched this interview live and there was no such interruption.

briatx
10-19-2007, 03:17 PM
I really doubt its possible to record ALL internet traffic, but you can bet your keyboard that the NSA sniffs traffic and data mines for certain words and phrases.

But I'm sure they would never use that power UNCONSTITUTIONALLY. :rolleyes:

Phil M
10-19-2007, 03:19 PM
It would be wouldn't it?

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=515477

Well, supporting Ron Paul isn't exactly like threatening the presidents life. I'm not sure what was going on there; the SS likely was data mining. For example, someone in the SS might read this post if I say "bomb white house osama freedom fighting nuke anarchy kill bush 9/11". And they have every right to; this is a public forum. Once they get into e-mails and stuff like that (which of course they do) you get into murky territory.

kenc9
10-19-2007, 03:20 PM
CSPAN Schedule date: Friday, October 12, 2007

10:31 AM EDT
0:30
LIVE
News Conference
Operations in Iraq
Department of Defense, Briefing Room
J.B. Burton , U.S. Army

Emergency over :D

thomj76
10-19-2007, 03:24 PM
Can you alter the title of this thread to reflect a cspan technical glitch, instead of something that others could construe to forward the tinfoil hat garbage?

mkrfctr
10-19-2007, 04:17 PM
But just because it cannot be explained doesn't mean that we should jump to conclusions. Consider what motives have to be involved: the DoD has to be tracking Ron Paul, see that he is appearing on C-SPAN, decide to interrupt the broadcast for thirty seconds even though that won't really do anything to disrupt his campaign, and ignore every other of his media appearances until today. If that's the best the "NWO global elitists" can do, I am not impressed. If that's all we're dealing with, we should be very relieved.

no, you fool! this was the subliminal message that triggers the DoD sleeper cells to their new targets. After their mission is complete a broadcast of Sponge Bob will revert them to their normal-citizen persona.

But until then they are simply killing machines! We must get a defense force of about 12 men armed with portable DVD Players and Sponge Bob DVDs around Ron at all times. Leave no angle uncovered. REMEMBER SPARE BATTERIES!

rodent
10-19-2007, 04:36 PM
I really doubt its possible to record ALL internet traffic, but you can bet your keyboard that the NSA sniffs traffic and data mines for certain words and phrases.

But I'm sure they would never use that power UNCONSTITUTIONALLY. :rolleyes:

The nature of the internet doesn't make snooping unconstitutional, if you ask me. If they happen to route your traffic through an FBI router as one of the hops to your destination, how would you know? There are dozens of third parties along the way between two hosts. The FBI could be providing you a "service" along the way, and the ISP's disclaimer about lack of privacy would hold.

We have problems like this to solve all the time in my line of work. The feds might probabilistically record such things and design tables to do so. It wouldn't be hard for them to, for example, capture all source and destination IP traffic to Alex Jones' web site or a jihadist web site and then use those values to construct a conditional probability in some kind of bayes-decision tree for threat assessment. The branch on the decision tree would have values like P( Threat | Alex Jones Viewer ), P( Threat | ~( Alex Jones Viewer ) for example.

At that point, it's just a matter of rerouting or duplicating that traffic for delayed analysis by intelligence analysts. They don't record everything, but they can route traffic differently probabilistically without you realizing. They don't actually have to increase latency and performance degradation if they duplicate the packet in parallel on hardware and use delayed writes to commit that traffic to disk.

I suspect a good portion of internet traffic is analyzed like this with no stress. The question is which aspects of this traffic get elevated for analysis by humans.

ronpaulhawaii
10-19-2007, 05:13 PM
that seems so so paranoid....I have a hard time believing that big brother is scouring the whole internet to record every word out there.....it would be real shocking if true.

Well, my big brother is a missionary in southeast asia and doesn't have time for such nonsense. I would think it is pretty naive to think that other nefarious cretins are not watching every aspect of the "liberty" movement very closely. The gubmint might not be archiving RPFs, but I'd imagine Rudy and Hillary's handlers are.


...
Someone in the AV Department was probably later admonished and given the punishment of having to watch paint dry.

;)

A/V dept? Couldn't be them!, they never do anything wrong ;):D