Future (and current) presidents seem unlikely to be encumbered by laws. They can spend or not spend the budget. They can fire and effectively disable lawful commissions. They are immune from criminal proceedings. They can have any personal financial interests. They can accept large gifts. They can tear down national monuments. Really makes following Congress and laws a lot less informative. ;-)
False equivalence is what enabled the Trump presidency. "All politicians are corrupt liars, therefore we'll elect the one who tells us the lies we like".
Corruption and evil are not binary, they're shades of grey. Trump might be bad, but he's not poisoning his opponents or throwing them out windows.
If all politicians are evil, the goal should be to elect the least-evil one.
we have been a puppet state for generations, its been warned about since the 1950's but only recently has it gotten so bad that average people have started to notice. senator jack tenney wrote a book called "zions trojan horse" way back in the 50s.
1. Israel is not an ally, Israel is not in NATO. Most US citizens do not support Israel and want to completely disentangle the US from Israel. Israel has attacked the US on many occasions going so far as to steal nuclear secrets (Jonathan Pollard).
2. The text makes it very clear that this is a merger. A sibling comment posted the exact copy, read it for yourself.
Where in the text do you see anything about a "merger"? Bilateral agreements to develop technology are common between countries. That is nothing resembling a merger. There is no discussion of joint command structure, joint budgeting, etc.
I speak as a US citizen, not as an Epstein blackmailed politician. Israel is our enemy. To requote the text:
> "... responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation, by-- (1) identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record; (2) ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;"
The IDF/Hasbara has been active on HN for over a decade. Trying to write things off as conspiracy theories doesn't work when the site is under persistent social influence attack by a state actor.
No, and if you ban me I'll make a new account on a fresh IP. I've seen IDF and Hasbara types posting literal copy-pasted verbatim-identical shill replies from multiple sockpuppet HN accounts, going all the way back to at least 2013. I'm not letting this go.
We banned that account a long time ago, but having taken a quick look I see no reason why you would call that a state propaganda account, other than (1) it expressed strong views that you strongly disagree with, and (2) that always makes a post more likely to seem fake, disingenuous, etc.
From my point of view, there's no evidence for this. Doesn't mean it wasn't true, of course, but in the absence of evidence I would go with the simpler explanation, which we know for a fact happens all the time: there are a lot of people who feel strongly about the topic and share the opinions this account was stating (just as there are on the opposing side).
I also don't think your theory is consistent with all the other posts that account made about everything from Photoshop to Javascript floats to package managers to whether rms is autistic, OpenBSD, and so on. Of course one can argue that this just proves how clever the state propagandists are, and how good at covering their tracks, but this line of reasoning ends up getting pretty absurd.
The fact is that HN has, and has had for years, very many commenters articulating these same opinions, sometimes within the site guidleines and sometimes not, and just the same is true of commenters articulating opposing positions. I don't see any difference between the comments people single out as examples of putative astroturfing and the others. Moreover there's nothing in the private data we have that would change this picture significantly. On the contrary, all the evidence points in the other direction: real users with strong feelings and therefore strong opinions.
This kind of thing is exactly why we have that guideline that asks users not to post accusations of astroturfing, foreign agenting and so on, but rather to contact us privately. We're not saying these things don't exist—but the odds that you (I don't mean you personally, of course, but everyone in this situation) are reading-in something that isn't there are orders of magnitude higher.
Dang, I would appreciate a reply, since you kind of skirted around my main point, which is that pro-Israel accounts have been posting copy-pasted verbatim-identical talking points going back all the way to at least 2014. Multiple accounts are literally posting the same word-for-word replies, but we're supposed to pretend that it's impossible for state actors to run influence operations on HN. How?
Why would multiple accounts make the same very specific "Please no simplified propaganda on HN" quip if they weren't collaborating somehow? How could multiple accounts arrive at that same exact phrasing if they weren't controlled by the same person or group of people? I honestly can't think of another rational explanation.
The particularly egregious instance I'm thinking of from back in 2013 would link back to my doxxable info, so unfortunately you'll have to take my word for it. Disappointing, I know, but it's not worth leaking anything when dealing with these vicious amoral scumbags. I do suggest at least familiarizing yourself with the scope of Hasbara's efforts on social media sites like and HN and reddit, however, as that is public information.
Not really sure how you have a productive conversation when one party says that not only will they consider that anyone who disagrees with them is acting on bad faith, but they intend to disregard all rules and circumvent any bans.
Anyway it's pretty obvious that talking about this topic is completely pointless so I'm going to quit for now because I'm not actually a sock puppet or a paid shill or whatever, I'm just a human being who has a differing opinion.
The only reason Israeli government influence operations persist on social media is because they manipulate and exploit site moderation to their advantage.
Future (and current) presidents seem unlikely to be encumbered by laws. They can spend or not spend the budget. They can fire and effectively disable lawful commissions. They are immune from criminal proceedings. They can have any personal financial interests. They can accept large gifts. They can tear down national monuments. Really makes following Congress and laws a lot less informative. ;-)
And now everybody screams that Putin is bad.
False equivalence is what enabled the Trump presidency. "All politicians are corrupt liars, therefore we'll elect the one who tells us the lies we like".
Corruption and evil are not binary, they're shades of grey. Trump might be bad, but he's not poisoning his opponents or throwing them out windows.
If all politicians are evil, the goal should be to elect the least-evil one.
Section 219 is treason.
Not if you're Israel-First.
No elected politician to the American government should be "Israel-first". Anyone stating such should be tried for treason.
Any president that wants to pause it can cite "national security".
That sounds pretty reasonable since Israel spies on the USA a lot
we have been a puppet state for generations, its been warned about since the 1950's but only recently has it gotten so bad that average people have started to notice. senator jack tenney wrote a book called "zions trojan horse" way back in the 50s.
[flagged]
1. Israel is not an ally, Israel is not in NATO. Most US citizens do not support Israel and want to completely disentangle the US from Israel. Israel has attacked the US on many occasions going so far as to steal nuclear secrets (Jonathan Pollard).
2. The text makes it very clear that this is a merger. A sibling comment posted the exact copy, read it for yourself.
This is factually wrong. Israel is a "major non-NATO ally" https://www.state.gov/major-non-nato-ally-status
Where in the text do you see anything about a "merger"? Bilateral agreements to develop technology are common between countries. That is nothing resembling a merger. There is no discussion of joint command structure, joint budgeting, etc.
I speak as a US citizen, not as an Epstein blackmailed politician. Israel is our enemy. To requote the text:
> "... responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation, by-- (1) identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record; (2) ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;"
[flagged]
[flagged]
The IDF/Hasbara has been active on HN for over a decade. Trying to write things off as conspiracy theories doesn't work when the site is under persistent social influence attack by a state actor.
[flagged]
No, and if you ban me I'll make a new account on a fresh IP. I've seen IDF and Hasbara types posting literal copy-pasted verbatim-identical shill replies from multiple sockpuppet HN accounts, going all the way back to at least 2013. I'm not letting this go.
Links? I'd like to see examples of the posts and accounts you have in mind.
Making a fresh child reply in case that helps visibility. Please see this linked example from 2014: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8406178
We banned that account a long time ago, but having taken a quick look I see no reason why you would call that a state propaganda account, other than (1) it expressed strong views that you strongly disagree with, and (2) that always makes a post more likely to seem fake, disingenuous, etc.
From my point of view, there's no evidence for this. Doesn't mean it wasn't true, of course, but in the absence of evidence I would go with the simpler explanation, which we know for a fact happens all the time: there are a lot of people who feel strongly about the topic and share the opinions this account was stating (just as there are on the opposing side).
I also don't think your theory is consistent with all the other posts that account made about everything from Photoshop to Javascript floats to package managers to whether rms is autistic, OpenBSD, and so on. Of course one can argue that this just proves how clever the state propagandists are, and how good at covering their tracks, but this line of reasoning ends up getting pretty absurd.
The fact is that HN has, and has had for years, very many commenters articulating these same opinions, sometimes within the site guidleines and sometimes not, and just the same is true of commenters articulating opposing positions. I don't see any difference between the comments people single out as examples of putative astroturfing and the others. Moreover there's nothing in the private data we have that would change this picture significantly. On the contrary, all the evidence points in the other direction: real users with strong feelings and therefore strong opinions.
This kind of thing is exactly why we have that guideline that asks users not to post accusations of astroturfing, foreign agenting and so on, but rather to contact us privately. We're not saying these things don't exist—but the odds that you (I don't mean you personally, of course, but everyone in this situation) are reading-in something that isn't there are orders of magnitude higher.
[editing - bear with me...]
Dang, I would appreciate a reply, since you kind of skirted around my main point, which is that pro-Israel accounts have been posting copy-pasted verbatim-identical talking points going back all the way to at least 2014. Multiple accounts are literally posting the same word-for-word replies, but we're supposed to pretend that it's impossible for state actors to run influence operations on HN. How?
Why would multiple accounts make the same very specific "Please no simplified propaganda on HN" quip if they weren't collaborating somehow? How could multiple accounts arrive at that same exact phrasing if they weren't controlled by the same person or group of people? I honestly can't think of another rational explanation.
The particularly egregious instance I'm thinking of from back in 2013 would link back to my doxxable info, so unfortunately you'll have to take my word for it. Disappointing, I know, but it's not worth leaking anything when dealing with these vicious amoral scumbags. I do suggest at least familiarizing yourself with the scope of Hasbara's efforts on social media sites like and HN and reddit, however, as that is public information.
Edit: looks like I actually had the foresight to use a throwaway in 2014, so there's no doxxable info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8406178
@dang please see this
@dang dang
Please see the above edit about Hasbara raids on HN.
@dang you want to weigh in here?
Not really sure how you have a productive conversation when one party says that not only will they consider that anyone who disagrees with them is acting on bad faith, but they intend to disregard all rules and circumvent any bans.
Anyway it's pretty obvious that talking about this topic is completely pointless so I'm going to quit for now because I'm not actually a sock puppet or a paid shill or whatever, I'm just a human being who has a differing opinion.
The only reason Israeli government influence operations persist on social media is because they manipulate and exploit site moderation to their advantage.