More like anyone who creates two fresh accounts within minutes of each other, one replying to the other in agreement—is either astroturfing, or trying to make it appear as if they are.
Personally, I think you're just a decent troll. If so, at least it was creative.
You're correct in that I do not wish to believe that astroturfing either directly or indirectly commissioned by GCHQ could be so incompetent. It sullies their good name.
Granted, what you're doing would actually qualify as somewhat competent if the goal was to simply to derail meaningful discourse.
I get why you used a throw away. I'm not against civil discussions, I just hate when people don't use logic and take all evidence with a grain of salt. I don't for a second doubt parts of the govt. are hiding valid evidence for the conversation any more than the media is lying to sell their narrative too. Bottom line is the media has the upperhand, they can make baseless claims and choose what to say knowing damn well that the Govt. can't refute it.
What's problematic is when there's two throwaway accounts created at the same time, replying to one another in agreement, using the same writing style, and advancing same the narrative that's worded as if it's straight out of a public relations office.
HN has seen at least one NSA employee and one American intelligence community member posting in the wake of Snowden, and both were overwhelmingly treated with respect by the community despite their views. I myself often express views here that are staunchly anti-Snowden in nature.
The throwaway accounts you're defending received such hostility because they were perceived as being insincere due to their suspicious posting behavior. It was not due to their views or opinions.