If you look to the right on this web page you'll see a contact form that allows you to send me a message, anonymously if you wish. Recently, I've received some odd anonymous messages sent through this form. They seem to be from some person or persons who are trying to convince me that they work for Social Security and that they have inside information to give me. However, the messages don't make sense. They seem to have been written by some person or persons who know a little about Social Security but not nearly enough to write something plausible. It's not been just one piece of bogus information that this person or persons have tried to sell me on. It's been several different things. I'd advise them to quit wasting their time. They're not doing anything other than getting me to scratch my head trying to figure out why they would do this. Even if they succeeded in writing something plausible, I'd still try to get confirmation before posting about it. Whatever they're up to, it's not likely to work.
10 comments:
Those Damn Russians are at it again, lol, lol
Weird.
Weird.
Well now you've got us all curious. Interested to know if it is well written. Could be a true paid shill at work.
I think explaining the general concepts alleged would be informative, but not lend any credibility to the allegations. I would presume it is either SSA is intentionally awarding/denying benefits for improper reasons, discrimination on sex/gender/race/religion/etc., or administrative waste.
Am I close?
I am curious, like 7:09.
11:00's comment questioning the credibility of such information was more than likely made by an Agency official who presumes said information would reflect poorly on those who run the Agency, and rightfully so, inasmuch as we have all witnessed on this blog alone the credibility of assertions concerning the awarding/denying of benefits for improper reasons, (Think Huntington, WV, and the Conn case; recent statistical analyses of ALJ decisions, AC Remands, and Court Remands); systemic and reoccurring issues concerning discrimination, PPP's, and Retaliation, (Think the recent Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Chicago Regional Office watchdog reports, removal of Regional Office personnel, and court cases; The Atlanta TV News Reports concerning disability discrimination and improper removal of two Regional Attorneys, SA-27, her former SA, and many others in this one HO forced out of their careers for no good reason over a period of several years without due process, and ROCALJ Ollie Garmon's eventual removal from his ROCALJ position); Administrative Waste, Fraud, and Abuse, (Think the promotion to higher levels of management by a ROCALJ removed for wrongdoing, and the relocation of an entire HO solely to appease him at a cost of millions in taxpayers money); and the Agency going to great lengths NOT to hold known wrongdoers accountable, (Think about all the examples cited over the past couple of years of to officials bending over backwards to prevent known wrongdoers from being held accountable in any way).
Almost ALL of these allegations have proven to be true. Without media sources such as your blog, Charles, much of this would go by unnoticed and unaddressed. This is why I think it is important you publish things which do not appear on their face to be a farce, and let the chips fall where they will with those of us who read your blog.
If everyone, including blogs, had remained quiet and never said a thing, Huntington would still be going on. It took the Agency years to respond, as it was. I say publish those things which are not on their face farcical.
@12:52
11:00 here.
I am not an agency official. I am a paralegal with a disability law firm. I was not questioning the credibility of the allegations. I am not even aware of what the allegations are. In regard to me presuming the allegations reflect poorly on the agency, I do presume the allegations reflect poorly on the agency. I also presume they are not wholly inaccurate, since I believe people are generally honest. But, I really can't presume much more of anything since I do not know what they are. I was assuming Charles was being careful not to lend additional credibility to the allegations as is his right in maintaining the blog.
The blog is so powerful "paid shills" are investing time to infiltrate and post. Here are some directions on building a good tin foil hat.
http://www.instructables.com/id/Aluminum-Foil-Hat/
@5:35
I do not see where publishing non-farcical "allegations" on a blog intimates Charles is lending any credibility to them. To the contrary, publishing them informs the public, and allows commentary, which is a good thing.
Personally, I would like to see Charles stop censoring the comments to the degree he is doing. It's one thing to censor ridiculous, non-sensical remarks by commenters, but quite another to censor substantive remarks concerning the subject matter and ensuing discussion in a thread. Just my two cents . . .
7:09 AM here. I'm thinking the allegations would be more along the line of widespread bribery of Claims Reps if it is a paid shill. I wouldn't put it past operatives of the CATO Institute or a similar organization. We are talking about mass deception campaigns masquerading as "think tanks" who didn't become as successful as they are by playing by any moral/ethical rules.
Post a Comment