Freedom to flame

[Richard Fiero]

David Morris wrote:
>http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/286/focus/Freedom_to_flame+.shtml
>
>By Nicholas Thompson, 10/13/2002
>
>THE OTHER DAY, a group of Americans gathered together to deliberate the wisdom
>of a war with Iraq.
>
>D. started it off with harsh words for President Bush,  . . .

>Of course, this conversation didn't occur at a university round table or in
>Harvard Square over tea and scones. It took place on the Yahoo! political
>discussion message board. The potshots above represent just a small sample of
>the discussion on an early October evening. But many of the 125,000 comments
>about the war posted in increasing numbers over the last 12 months display the
>same unedifying, sophomoric tone.

For the perceptive David Morris to pass along the above quote 
without a hint of analytical suspicion is surprising to me. 
Chat room personalities are of course just that -- personae. 
One way to discredit a point of view is to attack it and 
possibly anger the presenter of that POV. Another would be to 
pretend to adhere to it but present it in a flawed way. I'd not 
be surprised that two if not all three of the above 
discussion's participants were on the public payroll and in 
reality be 20-year old soldiers in training to be DIA spooks. 
The last time I did a survey of chat rooms was during the 
Clintock-Lewinsky debacle and it seemed clear to me that some 
Unnamed Force had packed the places with ringers. It may be 
useful to recall that CIA and DIA work for the President as 
does NPR. Plausible Deniability, anyone?
On this list there may be more names than people behind those 
names but the validity of a persona depends solely in the art, 
skill and style as it is played.
Thanks!