Yes The owner of Reddit is a long time Republican billionaire buddy of the Bushs -- Samuel Irving Newhouse, Jr.

Wow...no joke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cond%C3%A9_Nast_Publications#Technology

When talking about his other publications he says he personalty over sees everything. Do we actually think hes not going to censor/edit/ post propaganda/ or advertize?

With Jeb hitting the media, its a good time to get the bush name out.

Yep. The Bush family is trying to whitewash their history. Look at what they did with Newsweek:

Look who gets awarded the energy/resource contracts in every situation.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704328104574516901231406262

The Iraqi Oil Ministry on Thursday said it has awarded a consortium led by Exxon Mobil Corp. xom -1.31% and Royal Dutch Shell RDSB -1.48% PLC the right to develop the West Qurna-1 oil field, representing the first American-led team gaining access to the country's oil patch.

I'm sure that this part is just a coincidence though!

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/03/images/20080313-1_p031308jb-0021-515h.html

https://www.utexas.edu/president/past/faulkner-larry

Acquired Newsweek magazine research archive for the years through 1996 and the photographic archives of four award-winning White House photojournalists who have covered the nation’s presidents from Richard M. Nixon to George W. Bush

Sounds a lot like scratching each others back.

We invaded Iraq so that the Bush family mafia can give natural resource rights to their friends. They have been doing this within the "intelligence apparatus" for somewhere around 50 years from what you can dig up in history.

Larry R. Faulkner, 69 Independent Director The Lyndon Baines Johnson Foundation, University of Texas, Exxon Mobil Corp.

I heard Allen Dulles was securing Azerbaijani oil resources for Standard Oil way back in WWI, and of course various other empires have been doing it since forever.

And this is the link. Thank you for being astute.

So who do you reckon Allen Dulles was great friends with just prior to 11/22/63?

Where was George HW Bush?

Why was there a Zapata offshore rig just outside of Cuba?

Why was the CIA operation in Cuba called "Operation Zapata"?

Why did GHW Bush meet with Al Ulmer, the CIA coup expert on 11/21/63?

Why did George De Mohrenschildt (Oswald's handler) send GHW Bush a letter stating that he was worried he may have been talking to much and was being investigated?

But hey... that's just not possible... right?

We've never had a coup in the US, right?

Sources? I know I've heard some of those things before.

The best explanation that seems closest to the truth appears to be documented by Russ Baker in "Family of Secrets". It's very thoroughly documented.

He has the website whowhatwhy.com

I've never heard about Newhouse being friends with the Bushes. I searched on the web and also in two books about Newhouse ( one , two ) and I don't see anything about Newhouse and Bush being friends.

Wow... that is freaky deaky. I guess this site is more compromised than I thought

The voting is completely padded with bot votes bare minimum. Or the worst people who are drunk listening to slayer dressed in all black sharpening their switchblades to use on cats in their neighborhood. I vote for rigging.

The voting is completely padded with bot votes bare minimum

Sometimes I think I miss the 'old' reddit days, but then I remember the site was basically built on fake accounts and fake upvotes to get traction. There's no way that's any different today.

Do you think they made this site for fun? They had plans, It's always been about the money.

About the pulpit.

History will not be kind to the Bush family.

just like it wasn't too the hapsburgs? or the tudors? or the glucksburgs?

They weren't guilty of trying to destroy their own countries from within.

Wait you mean the Scherff Family ?

According to the deathbed confessions of Otto Skorzeny , anyways.

This is absolutely believeable. And the likeness in the photos is uncanny.

Prescott Bush helped Hitler and his spawn went on to become U.S. Presidents.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

George Sr. may have been complicit in the JFK assassination.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/jfk-ii-the-bush-connection/

He went on to be the head of the CIA, which seems impossible considering the connection between his father and the Nazis. I had a buddy in the military who was denied a TS clearance because his grandfather was a Nazi. At least that is what he claimed.

They write history however they want. I'll bet 1 karma point that 100 years from now, they will be on Mt. Rushmore.

Is there a way to keep track of the shill accounts?

Reddit Enhancement Suite. Shill tagging is like Pokemon. Betcha can't tag 'em all! It's fun to go into a thread and see familiar usernames doing their thing. Most stick to specific subjects but there are the occasional wanderers.

After they get downvoted enough, activity stops and new accounts start to appear, rinse, repeat. Our advantage is that they are on our turf and we are not limited by cubicle space or number or employees.

Shill tagging is like Pokemon. Betcha can't tag 'em all!

I am too old to have any connection with Pokemon, but it sounds a lot like Transformers was, in terms of trying to collect them. Every time you had a complete set, Hasbro would release a new 'wave", most of which were just the same exact toys in different colors and as different characters, or the same exact design with tiny tiny variations.

Was poor. Had GoBots. Many fights with friends trying to justify why GoBots were better than Transformers. Deep down I knew the truth, but was prideful.

I'm sorry.

That's a perfect analogy! I'm not into the Pokemon fever myself but considering Reddit I thought it would make a relatable enough reference.

Is it possible to make use of the suite on a mobile reddit flow?

I don't think so, it's a shame too because when I'm on my phone I can't see the tags so it's shot in the dark when I reply to someone.

How do you turn on shill tagging? I can find that option in the settings

You have to click the little arrow next to the name of a user.

Excatly! I mean, I've got all your sock puppet accounts tagged the same way.

At least MOST of them. You have quite a few.

Far too easy to identify. They are so fearful of the truth. It's ubbelieveable that so much money and effort is spent on their public lies PR campaign.

The problem with a shill hunt is the temptation to call "shill" whenever someone disagrees with you. I was accused of being a shill because I challenged one of the more ridiculous assertions of a 9/11 truther. That's right, in the same thread that the truther claimed only a tiny powerful group of people were in on the alleged 9/11 conspiracy, I was basically accused of being one of those people, paid by the conspirators to infiltrate Reddit. It's one thing to point out obvious corporate accounts and what not, but the shill concept encourages lazy thinkers to just brand debate opponents as part of the conspiracy.

Do you know what sets off bells? Calling people truthers.

Then again, you're a 9/11 debunker so it doesn't surprise me someone called you a shill. I personally prefer "paid government apologist".

But you saying that the government is paying me to cover up 9/11 means that I am part of the conspiracy. A conspiracy so secret, with only such powerful people in control, but a conspiracy that has a Reddit infiltration arm.

Reddit, GLP, ATS, and many other forums have been infiltrated by paid government apologists. It's called swaying public opinion, AKA propaganda.

Keep trying to make up excuses, it really shows your true colors.

You can look at my years of posting history to conclude I'm not some G-man here to convince you that 9/11 was Al Qaeda's fault.

My problem is that you can't accept that someone can believe the mainstream version without being paid. On the one hand, you call the masses that reject a 9/11 conspiracy "dupes" or "sheeple", but when one of them engages in debate, they're suddenly "conspirator" or "shill". Not to mention, it's just an ad hominem that doesn't advance the discussion.

Those who genuinely engage the debate are more open minded than those obviously in it for debunking purposes.

The masses are not dupes or paid to believe the lie, they are victims of propaganda. Rejecting conflicting evidence is a clear sign of cognitive dissonance, but first you have to look at the evidence which something shills refuse to do and acknowledge.

Shills will pretend to look at the evidence, but just long enough to "debunk" it with anything that sounds good enough to pass.

I remember the Screw Loose Change "debunking" that was nit-picking the word Loose Change used to describe the pile of rubble as "small", when the pile was arguably bigger than small.

When they got that desperate that they focused on arguing the size of the pile, I knew they really had nothing and were grasping at straws.

Its the little things that left unchecked become problems later on:

• It was a little pile

• Fell in its own footprint

• Only a few small fires.

• Thermite

• Pull it

etc.

When a point is made, and that point is wrong, it needs to be highlighted and corrected, otherwise it will magically transform itself into evidence and then argued about as fact by the next set of truthers.

And this correcting SHOULD come from the conspiracy theory community, but it doesn't. So it gets pointed out by the opposition and then they get accused of nit-picking.

A fact is a fact, and if the truthers are so caught up in the truth, perhaps they should ensure that their statements are truthful in the first place.

Here's an example from today: arguing my word choice.

You said it, grasping at straws.

Ad hominem.

Argue the facts, not the person.

I don't want to make a straw man argument against you, but I will say that when I was discussing 9/11 with someone else on this subreddit, we couldn't even agree whether Al Qaeda / Bin Laden claimed responsibility. He dug up some Fox News article from 2001 where Bin Laden initially denied culpability before the invasion of Afghanistan, and wouldn't acknowledge all the subsequent videos etc where Bin Laden claimed responsibility. That is a hard place to start a debate, when fundamental facts are disputed.

This is precisely the example of cherry picking evidence to support a particular worldview, which is the opposite of an honest intellectual process.

An honest intellectual process takes into consideration all evidence whether it conflicts with your core beliefs or not.

This is the point I'm trying to make. Those with ulterior motives will not account for such evidence. Rather they will dismiss completely, deflect, attack the source, or appeal to N fallacies to justify denying the validity of the claims while not addressing the evidence itself.

Thankfully, the observational selection fallacy is fairly easy to deduce, which is why doing research on a statement made can be beneficial.

I think that's true to a point. Ad hominem attacks and appeals to authority are fallacies. But, when you start taking on extremely technical details like the physics of steel, or the process of demolitioning a building, it's appropriate to consider the expertise of a source.

Imagine my surprise that this comment was downvoted.

The expertise of a source can and is often use to discredit under the guise of the appeal to authority fallacy when it's not convenient.

This is often the case whenever Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is brought up. The evidence they present, however, is rarely addressed.

While the appeal to authority fallacy is valid, there is something to be said for the source being named that carries with it a level of credibility.

For example, people would tend to believe something that was published in Science magazine more so than something that came from Beforeitsnews.com.

Or maybe not.

There's some discussion regarding the authenticity of the bin Laden tapes you're referencing.

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/index.html?iref=storysearch

Osama bin Laden allegedly initially denied involvement in 9/11.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/international/30osamaCND.html?_r=0

Osama bin Laden allegedly took credit for 9/11 in 2004, just in time to help George W Bush's re-election campaign with a convenient "October surprise".

At the same time that video was being shown to MSM consumers around the world, the internet was being shown how that video was just a video from some other situation that was regurgitated with a new translation and being passed off as new.

https://www.google.com/search?q=bin+laden+tape+fake+2004

Not allegedly. Clear as day he denied the attack on innocent people. Stating that thru do not do such things. One group in that region is well known for killing innocent women and children to further their perverted goals.

I have had to resort to qualifying many of my statements with the word "allegedly", even if I link to an allegedly reputable source, because when the media fabricates a big lie like 9/11, its hard to know where reality ends and fiction begins.

All I can say for sure is that conflicting reports were made. When that happens, its difficult to know which statement is true and which is false, or even if they are both false.

He looks and sounds exactly like him. Same mannerisms. Same tonal quoalities. The first one. After that, there was no way to pass off peopele that gold wearing iman as obl. Not even close.

The speculation that the 2004 video is fake is not convincing. The author just thinks Bin Laden looks a little different in videos taken three years apart. Besides, Bin Laden references the 9/11 attacks in many recordings, including another in 2006 when he again takes responsibility. You can browse the list for yourself. It's a pretty unambiguous narrative.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videos_and_audio_recordings_of_Osama_bin_Laden

You also have other Al Qaeda describing their roles (and Bin Laden's) in 9/11. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described to Al Jazeera in 2002 how he organized 9/11. After his capture, KSM again made no effort to deny his role live in court.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/04/alqaida.terrorism

To fit your narrative, we either have to expand the conspiracy to include Al Qaeda as informed conspirators, or we have to posit that all of these videotapes, audio recordings and interviews has been fabricated on such a massive scale around the world, with Al Jazeera complicit.

Not.even close. The video where he denies involvement is clearly him. The later videos "found" in the field (see: manufactured) look NOTHING like him, and are.obviously faked. Even Cheney has publicly stated that the administration has never made the point that Bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. What you're spouting off is pure propaganda fiction.

All you are giving me is personal incredulity that he looks different to you. That is not compelling. Not to mention, when you think about what you're saying, the magnitude of the conspiracy starts to break under its own weight.

To maintain the ruse you are proposing, the entire CIA would now have to be in on it, or at least any analyst with Bin Laden expertise. Not to mention foreign intelligence agencies who might have an interest in blowing the whistle on a US conspiracy. If it's so trivially obvious to you, did we somehow fool them too, or are they part of the plot?

What about KSM's multiple, detailed admissions before and after he was in custody, some of them published by Al Jazeera, not the US media?

His looks, voice, mannerisms, and wearing fucking gold. It's clearly not him.

You're guilty of the same thing you're railing against if you think the people you disagree with in this sub all act the exact same way. Plenty of regulars have decried the labeling of people on all sides.

I've been accused by you nutjobs of being paid by the government many times. Still yet to receive a single dollar for my efforts :(. C'MON OBAMA!

We know that there are paid shills in the internet. If you conduct yourself like a shill, you will be called a shill. If you are not being paid to be a shill, then you should know you are being ripped off because others are being paid to do what you are doing. If you conduct yourself like a shill, but honestly believe you are persuing your own interests, you are what is called a fellow- traveler or a useful idiot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellow_traveller

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

Or perhaps someone with an opinion that differs from the craziness here at /r/conspiracy ?

Compartmentalization. You can be a very small, and insignificant player that serves a specific purpose. It does not mean you participated in the round table with the big wigs. You're obviously not important enough. You can be just doing what you're told by those who really know the truth.

Kinda like the soldier on the ground who is shooting at another soldier on the ground. Each of them doing their bosses dirty work but not fully understanding why.

If I suspect someone, I tag them. As time goes on, if im wrong, I change the tag.

I do the same. If later I see someone making an insightful comment, I go back to the link on the tag to see why he was tagged that way. I've been pleasantly proved wrong on more than one occasion.

Yes. A sure shot way to beat shills is to use common sense, rely on scientific evidence and keep looking for the truth.

If a shill says something good, it doesnt have to be downvoted. If someone lies or propagates BS, they arent necessarily a shill.

We must cultivate impeccable judgement. I use my sense of metasmell.

Is it me, or is reddit getting shadier by an ever increasing rate lately?

[deleted]

Even ours. They tried very hard with sws, but he blew his wad far too soon. Typical.

When people call you out for demonizing communism or they are praising karl marx as a great contributor to economics never hearing of adam smith...yeah, it gets sketchy.

Edit: or a von mises.

Karl Marx was a great contributor to economics.

Karl Marx's subjective field theories that have been widely accepted amongst philosophical groups are not contributions to economics, as they were never applied and incalculable.

http://mises.org/daily/5114

Reddit Exposed Cofounders Built Reddit with Army of Fake Accounts - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyoaHi65crE

Haha looks like my buddy /u/duckvimes_ has even made an appearance to defend this bullshit:

Or, it's not a "propaganda operation" that involves reposting things on reddit and is instead simply a joke. Have you seriously never seen people do this before?

Occam's Razor would not lead to this being propaganda, you moron. If you compare the OP and the top poster's accounts, you'll see that it's obviously a karma grab. One posts links, the other posts high-scoring comments. It's not propaganda. Use your fucking brain, please.

This from a guy who's been banned for brigading, brilliant!

/u/duckvimes

1,502 link karma 11,000 comment karma

29 days...

His account looks shadowbanned right now...

Nope, bad link, his user name needs a _ at the end.

Edit: nm, the name without the _ is shadowbanned.

His first account that was shadowbanned for vote brigading didn't have _ at the end. So the link is legit.

See this link ...we have some history.

Here's his post complaining about me in /r/conspiratard and he gets ruthlessly downvoted, which was strangely satisfying.

Here's his post from before where he complains about being banned for brigading (before I "met" him), courtesy of /u/InternetPropagandist .

Hope that helps :)

Edit: Gold just made my night, lol, thanks!

I come in peace...surely reddit gold is pure filth...so I'm confused (a little drunk too, admittedly) nobody should want want gold

btw, have just about finished JP Farrell's LBJ JFK book, it's awesome...

Haha I don't give a shit about gold it just was unexpected and amusing!

Also, you have good taste because that LBJ book is really, really good. Sacrifice of the King and all.

Oh brother, don't get me started.

Surely there must be some kind of non-sinister explanation for all of this. None come to mind :s

Its reddit being reddit. The OP of the new one is a professional reposter, 8000 link karma in 18 days, most likely building up the account to sell.

Wait --- this is a thing? people buy high karma accounts?

Yup.

We still catch them as soon as they fly their true colors. The shills here are incredibly easy to identify publicly. It is our duty to out them.

What's the incentive?

Advertising.

Where can I go that is not reddit? With all the pro fracking bs and now this, I just dont want to be here anymore

GLP has breaking news much faster than Reddit, it has more threads posted every day and no up/down votes. You can determine "good-quality" threads on GLP by the 5-star rating system over on the right-hand side of the page. I prefer GLP over anywhere else because it has the most intellectual posters I've ever met in any online community.

Check out this website to get you started.

[deleted]

Okay so you've basically outlined that spooks run all 5 communities.

Comparing the communities themselves, regardless of who runs them... GLP still has absolute breaking news - with reputable links to back it up - faster than the others. I know where I go to check my news. You're free to peruse /pol/ along with the other 4chan-loving teenagers if that's the type of community you prefer(that website looks worse than '99 SMF if we're really talking about web design, completely ignoring content).

GLP has people from teens to 60s and 70s. People educated in all backgrounds. Most people who post there(and pay for membership to get around IP bans) know about Lucas and probably know about all the other communities as well. GLP still has absolute breaking news with the most detailed comprehensive breakdowns compared to any other community I've ever visited.

There is no "un-infiltrated" community out there. If your point was to make people wary of frequenting GLP because it's a datamining operation... guess what, so is Reddit.

GLP has some very fine users. I should have clarified that in my post. I only wanted to pull the blanket back on the owner a little bit to offer a little info for users who naively embrace a community without knowing the history. I enjoy GLP SH threads (among countless others) as the community investigators have been excellent in their work.

My main point was not the community but the ownership of the communities. Everyone knows about the teenage angst on /pol/ but I wasn't talking about the demographics of the poeple who post there but the track record of the site owner. I was comparing censorship and Poole has found a way to let users practice free speech while other sites like GLP have so much censorship you have to question it. Also there was a time on /new/ that the stormfags were not there, and sometimes glimpses of that once great era make a return and get my hopes up.

But you are correct, GLP is a good forum with great investigations. I would recommend and have done so =).

GLP is 100% controlled. The Fox News of actual truth, if you will.

Usenet. It's old, strange and insecure, but still manages to work. It's good to get off the web every now and then.

Wow. When it comes to Reddit, I just swallowed the red pill.

Hence more bullshit supporting easily the worst, most destructive puppet president of all time. Fuck Bush. Their entire worthless, soulless family. You will pay for your crimes against humanity. Karma at this level exists.

This thread might get brigaded.

Here is what I found.

Upvotes: 320 | Downvotes: 71 | Timestamp of this thread

We have been mentioned 100 times by /r/conspiratard since I started counting.

If this was an error, send me a message

There was another proBush post that was heavily upvoted (no I don't have the link). But I joked the admins must have put their finger on the scale. Guess I was right.

Of course you were. I.challenge anyone to find three real people that actually like Bush. Both father and son are corrupted garbage through and through. The truest of enemies of this great nation.

This is insane

Reddit is much like the real world. Most of the users trend liberal. The powers that be provide "conservative" views and try really hard to make the two look even.

There are plenty of good conservative view points that come from users. In general what I see is that they "Greed is good" crowd and "the military is always 110% awesome especially when deployed" are the power dealing that want the tax dollars to continue to flow into their petty empires.

and the middle class gets screwed every time.

This thread has been linked to from elsewhere on reddit.

• [ /r/conspiratard ] Something positive about Bush makes it to the front page? Must be shills!

^{I am a bot. Comments? Complaints? Send them to my inbox!}

Redact, Edit... Reddit!

Good find OP. Jeb Bush must be running in the next election.

Those crazy little conservatives, still trying to make Nixon a hero, Ronald a Saint and now, Geo. W.'s turn to be made a hero. You will believe what you are told.

Didn't you know W. saved the free world, singlehandedly.

/s

yeah slather some more make-up on that pig. Not that it will help any.

The sad truth is that he fucks them raw with or without the eyeliner. Shit-covered balls swaying in the wind.

this one example is an elaborate propaganda operation? I'd say the media is elaborate

Has anybody tried messaging him to see why he posted same comment?

Post this outside of reddit. So people can see!

Or karma whores.

I believe both exist so being certain it's one or the other is impossible.

Karma whores would not go back and word for word copy a post, especially not 5 in a row. That's ridiculous. Reddit is clearly being gamed.

research the owner, follow the money trail.

Who'se to say they are not one and the same on this site?

I swear to god if this turns out to be 4chan....

Then what?

Reddit has done similar shit before. Are two threads that are the same in the same post a conspiracy as well? Even when they are parodying each other?

How is Aleister Crowley son going is he still doing those pretty pictures?

GWB would be his grandson and it's not 100% confirmed.

Yeah your right grandson.

Proof would be leaked documents proving paid coordination to game reddit. This is just more karma idiocy that we've all grown accustomed to.

your logic gives too much respect to the past paradigm of authority and truth. Its only truthful if theres a money paper-trail? Bullshit.

Nope. I just have some regard for the word proof . Proof doesn't belong to the realm of intuition or inference, proof is an absolute. Noticing a pattern is not proof; maybe patterns are a discovery, maybe patterns even give you new understanding, but they're not irrefutable proof. But hey, if you think op has really found proof, more power to you.

i have regard for the term proof. I just dont stop at face value, as if documents arent falsifiable. The question is when do we accept something as absolute, for you you its a paper trail. For me even causation has space for new inferences and isnt absolute. By aligning your regard for proof with the same regard as authorities, it gives them a basis for future determination of truth. Some would say the very idea of proof is fallible.

I am not comfortable with his restrictions on the standard of acceptance for a proof as leaked documents proving paid coordination to game reddit . According to him, all of these conditions must be met:

1. a whistleblower
2. a paper trail
3. a currency transfer
4. displayed intent to conspire via coordination

That tells me he would not make a very good lawyer. He is, however, correct that this is no proof per se. It's only evidence. Rather strong evidence but still just that.

Bearing in mind how hard such proof would be to come by (as with so many things) is it not both customary and entirely reasonable to rely on one's personal assessment of the balance of probabilities ?

/u/duckvimes

1,502 link karma 11,000 comment karma

29 days...

Karl Marx was a great contributor to economics.

research the owner, follow the money trail.

Its reddit being reddit. The OP of the new one is a professional reposter, 8000 link karma in 18 days, most likely building up the account to sell.

His first account that was shadowbanned for vote brigading didn't have _ at the end. So the link is legit.

Ad hominem.

Argue the facts, not the person.

The speculation that the 2004 video is fake is not convincing. The author just thinks Bin Laden looks a little different in videos taken three years apart. Besides, Bin Laden references the 9/11 attacks in many recordings, including another in 2006 when he again takes responsibility. You can browse the list for yourself. It's a pretty unambiguous narrative.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videos_and_audio_recordings_of_Osama_bin_Laden

You also have other Al Qaeda describing their roles (and Bin Laden's) in 9/11. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described to Al Jazeera in 2002 how he organized 9/11. After his capture, KSM again made no effort to deny his role live in court.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/04/alqaida.terrorism

To fit your narrative, we either have to expand the conspiracy to include Al Qaeda as informed conspirators, or we have to posit that all of these videotapes, audio recordings and interviews has been fabricated on such a massive scale around the world, with Al Jazeera complicit.

Not allegedly. Clear as day he denied the attack on innocent people. Stating that thru do not do such things. One group in that region is well known for killing innocent women and children to further their perverted goals.