Replies

I have no problem with them trying to make money, I do have a problem with the "most important" information being put in the pay section. If it is really vital to saving lives, it is a shame you have to pay to see it. I do think that certain things, like videos and special analysis, should be for paying customers. The found nuke story, if true, should be available to the public IMO.

I don't have a problem with NEIN trying to make money either. I do have a problem with the methods NEIN uses to make the money.

First, the use of "homelandsecurityus" in the web address may suggest to the unwary that the website is associated with the United States Department of Homeland Security, which of course, it is not; and a person using a web search engine to find the real website for the US Dept. of Homeland Security could get steered to NEIN's site. I have no idea whether the potential for confusion is intentional or not, but from my standpoint, the intent is irrelevant. I do note, however, that up until about December of last year, NEIN used its own name in its web address.

Second, NEIN has a tendency to report as absolute fact claims that are based upon unverifiable, top secret information allegedly obtained from top secret sources deep within the various government intelligence agencies. A perfect example is when NEIN reported last January -- as an absolute fact -- that US Special Ops had "bagged and tagged" OBL in Pakistan, and then personally attacked anyone here who dared to question the accuracy of the report. Although I haven't read NEIN's pay to view article about the nukes allegedly found in NYC, I suspect that the report is also based upon top secret information from super secret sources deep within the US Intel community (otherwise the entire world would know about it), which means that NEIN is once again trading upon information that we can neither verify nor debunk. Everyone is obviously free to draw their own conclusions, but I'm not about to accept as true an unverifiable intel report from a relatively obscure website just because the owners of the website charge a hundred bucks a year for the privilege of reading the super-secret intelligence information.

Third, I can't for life of me figure out why the people at NEIN always seem to have exclusive access to top secret information. Although I realize that the US Gov't sometimes leaks secret stuff on purpose, I can't imagine why it would do so through a relatively obscure website that charges a hefty annual fee for access to the information, and then makes its subscribers "sign" a confidentiality agreement in which they agree not to disclose the information to anyone else. The whole idea of a deliberate leak is to get the word out, and that is not going to happen if the intel is leaked through a relatively unknown website that charges a fee to read the information and then prohibits the people who have paid for the information from passing it on to others, which brings me to my final point.

Fourth, if sources within US Intel aren't deliberately leaking the so-called top secret info to NEIN, then that means either (a) the info is at least partially BS at worst or the product of a creative imagination at best; or (b) people within the US Intel community are illegally disclosing classified, top secret information to the owners of a commercial website in violation of the law. If the info is BS or creative writing, in whole or in part, then NEIN shouldn't be selling it as fact. If the info is accurate, but top secret, then NEIN is charging for information that was not only illegally disclosed, but obtained by US Intel in the first place with taxpayer money. Stated another way, if the top secret intel information that NEIN disseminates is, in fact, true and accurate, then NEIN is basically charging its taxpaying subscribers to read illegally disclosed classified information that was obtained in the first place with taxpayer money.

This is my opinion and my opinion only. Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions or to give as much or as little weight to NEIN or any other source as they deem appropriate. Like everything else you buy on the internet, caveat emptor.

I took alot of heat here with my views on NEIN since last year but I stand by them. I was chastised for chasing Sean away and I backed off. Not because I didn't believe in what I saw, but out of respect for this thread.

It is seven months later and I will say what you have posted needed to be said IMHO

I was impressed with the homelandsecurity.com, so yes it did make me read the site, took a few weeks to realise they were not at all connected to DHS ~my bad~

And I took heat also on the bagged and tagged and even questioning Sean here, but I am not a mindless Stepford Wife so excuse me for having my own mind and thoughts, was not allowed

I don't think a membership of $99 is a privilege for I work hard to find news, as does everyone involved and dedicated to TM, we do this for our country. We do not need to be taken advantage of by anyone with claims on the net to pursue any investigations of terror

if sources within US Intel aren't deliberately leaking the so-called top secret info to NEIN, then that means either (a) the info is at least partially BS at worst or the product of a creative imagination at best; or (b) people within the US Intel community are illegally disclosing classified, top secret information to the owners of a commercial website in violation of the law. If the info is BS or creative writing, in whole or in part, then NEIN shouldn't be selling it as fact. If the info is accurate, but top secret, then NEIN is charging for information that was not only illegally disclosed, but obtained by US Intel in the first place with taxpayer money. Stated another way, if the top secret intel information that NEIN disseminates is, in fact, true and accurate, then NEIN is basically charging its taxpaying subscribers to read illegally disclosed classified information that was obtained in the first place with taxpayer money.

I would like this answered also?