Obama czar proposed government should ‘infiltrate’ social network sites, chat rooms, message boards
Just prior to his appointment as President Obama’s so-called regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein wrote a lengthy academic paper suggesting the government should “infiltrate” social network websites, chat rooms and message boards.
Such “cognitive infiltration,” Sunstein argued, should be used to enforce a U.S. government ban on “conspiracy theorizing.”
Among the beliefs Sunstein classified as a “conspiracy theory” is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.
The find comes as a government document reportedly relates the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s command center routinely monitors dozens of popular websites, including Facebook, Twitter, Hulu, WikiLeaks and news sites including the Huffington Post and Drudge Report.
Reuters reported that a “privacy compliance review” issued by DHS last November confirms that since at least June 2010, the department’s national operations center has been operating a “Social Networking/Media Capability” which involves regular monitoring of “publicly available online forums, blogs, public websites and message boards.”
The government document states such monitoring is meant to “collect information used in providing situational awareness and establishing a common operating picture” to help manage national or international emergency events.
Harold
ACGR's "News with Attitude" 
Too bad they changed the meaning of the law as usual.There is nothing wrong in joying diverse opinions and discuss the issue or learn what they really say since the Media tends to twist. However that differ from
spying. I do no agree with all on this blog but I like to know why they think as they do and often I agree because I get the right version from the horse mouth.
In Jan. 2010 it was reported Top Obama Czar Cass Sunstein supported infiltrating and spying on Americans, their groups and organizations to disrupt and neutralize Americans that spread conspiracy theories, including against U.S. Government. This would be accomplished in part by U.S. Government assets disseminating counter-information.
Interestingly, Cass Sunstein’s infiltration proposal appeared to resemble Rep. Jane Harman’s “2007 Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act” HR 1955 that stressed, disrupting political and other groups without evidence of wrongdoing. Had Harman’s bill passed, U.S. Government would have the power to spy on and intimidate Americans from exercising their Constitutional Right to Free Speech and Association. Millions of Americans would fear supporting or attending any political and other “planned meeting” out of concern they might be labeled a terrorist or supporter of Home Grown Terrorism or Violent Radicalization.
Under Rep. Harman’s “2007 Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act” Government would only have to allege a group member “Thought about committing violence or damaging property” to label an individual or group “prone” to committing “Violent Radicalization or Terrorism. Activists who set up web sites promoting a “Planned Activity”; wrote, emailed or handed out “flyers” promoting a “Planned” event or demonstration could be alleged to have inspired Violent Radicalization or Homegrown Terrorism—even if not violence occurred. Demonstrators alleged by police to have blocked a roadway, intimidated drivers, shoppers, employees; anyone from entering or leaving a place could be accused of coercing government or its people. Under the Harmon legislation “Information flyers” NOT intended by the author to be distributed by a particular group or at a planned event—but somehow got distributed, could potentially open the door for government to charge the author promoted “Violent Radicalization or Homegrown Terrorism. Such concerns could have crushed written dissent.
The “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act” mentioned, “any planned meeting or bodily act in America” against a U.S. foreign alley; no violence was required. For example: American labor unions, human rights and environmental organizations could potentially have been at risk under The “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act” if they (planned or had meetings in America) to lawfully protest a foreign U.S. alley and or networked with or supported foreign activists that intended or protested a U.S. foreign alley. The Harmon bill appeared to criminalize constitutionally protected 1st amendment activities. Had the Harmon bill passed, U.S. Government, federal and state police would have had little difficulty terminating American activists and organizations exercising their Constitutional Right to Free Speech, Free Association and Expression. Police and Agent Provocateurs could easily destroy e.g. any anti-war group or organization by covertly joining a protest demonstration to instigate violence; or undercover police covertly contacting a groups’ participants before, at or after a “planned” meeting or demonstration… (then lie) allege a group member committed or intended to commit violence in order that government could assert a group was ideologically based toward violence; supported “Violent Radicalization or Homegrown Terrorism. Although The 2007 “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act” Failed To Pass, subsequently in 2012, Congress destroyed and diminished many of Americans’ Constitutional Rights upon Pres. Obama signing The National Defense Authorization ACT of 2012 (NDAA). Under NDAA, U.S. Government does not need probable cause or corroborating evidence to Indefinitely Detain Americans on U.S. Soil without charges if suspected of being involved in terrorism or posing a threat to National Security. Consequently Indefinitely Detained Americans have no right to legal counsel, a trial or Habeas Corpus. Alarmingly Corrupt Police, Government Agents and Agent Provocateurs may too easily falsify reports and give false testimony see (COINTELPRO) to cause U.S. Government to disappear Americans; cause innocent U.S. Citizens to be swept off the street and indefinitely incarcerated based only on suspicion that someone is a terrorist or involved in terrorism. Note no actual planned, intended or violent act is required for U.S. Government to allege someone is involved in terrorism under (NDAA).