Don't forget to check the pockets and the email of your live partner, mate.

I have been giving her the benefit of the doubt for 17 years now. So far, worked out pretty well. :up:

After 17 years better assume she knows what she wants to know. :)

Tell her you love her! You'll appreciate it.

"...Garcia Linera denounced during a special press issue in the main courtyard of the Presidential Palace in La Paz. Accompanied by the Cabinet as a whole in their quality of Bolivian president in office, Garcia Linera denounced also the flagrant violation of the Vienna Convention regarding the official flights and use of airspace and airports, previously consented."

Two of the most important phrases a man needs in a relationship is

I love you
I am sorry

However, never never use them together "I am sorry that I love you". It does not work out well. :oops::D

Who are the bigger fools?
The fools or the fools who follow them?

It's like a column of moles where the lead mole keeps stopping and the rest get to smell molasses.

Do you have any evidence that it isn't working?

This is the very nature of intelligence gathering. To know as much as possible about as many things as possible. Anything less is bad intelligence. It's the nature of the business. I didn't say I agree with it. I simply recognize that it exists and that it is part of our world.

Again, do you have any evidence of that?

Oh you don't have to accept it or like it. I didn't say that. But I think you should get use to it because I think it's only going to get worse. And when they tell you they're not doing it any more will you believe them?

The belief that you, the average citizen is being watched 24/7 by guys in black suits is mild paranoia and absurd. They are not the least bit interested in you. Unless, of course you give them a reason to be. Are you?

Are you referring to a police state? If so that is not the same thing.

I don't think it is ever that clear a choice.

I for one would rather have black suits monitoring everybody than to have some poor misfortunates being tortured in Gitmo for the same piece of information. How about you?

Of course. If I decide to rent a SUV and drive through your next mall - killing shoppers in the name of my god - until some policeman kills me, because I wouldn't stop until I'm dead. How would your total surveillance hinder me?

The advantage of who does what, where, when and by which means is not to counter with any surveillance. You would have to mind control everybody to be somewhat sure to be safe.

This is mumbo - To kill your wife, your father and your whole familiy is the nature of insane killing. To kill as many as possible as fast as possible. Anything less is inefficient. The nature - you know. I don't say I like it, but I simply recognize it exists...

As far as I know there was not enough capacity to spy on everybody in the past. Evidence? The same evidence as your Grand-grand-father breathed air.
Another foul question.

Yeah! Why don't we accept the terrorists to bomb our homes?

The black suits are a comparison to clarify the situation of being under surveillance - and you understand it very well. Mumbo.

How can I know if I give someone a reason of interest? I have no control over it. That's the problem with this 'I have nothing to hide' statement. Maybe this conversation is a reason to check both of us.

No. I.E. the Third Reich and the DDR were no police states. They were just checking their people for certain attributes. The people should have got used of it, because it was natural for the systems.

Simply non-sequitur! https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

Bad style of discussion.

You and I both know this is not what you were referring to and that these types of random mindless events are not preventable. On the other hand if you had been discussing this act in a monitored communication with like minded people, well....


Good response. I'll try again. The very nature of intelligence is to gather as much as possible and analyze it. In this trade there is no such thing as too much information. What is irrelevant is discarded but nothing is irrelevant until it is analyzed.

What I don't understand is your equating intelligence gathering to the insane killing of a family. Care to explain?

Careful, my friend, careful. And that's not much of an answer. In fact that's no answer at all.

Yes. That is exactly what I was referring to. The question stands. Why would they be interested in you? Answer. They're not.

Well, you got me there. I'm speechless.

The two possibilities suggested are not the only possibilities nor did I suggest they were. I noticed you didn't answer.

Yea okay, I tried.

We'd take him, We even had an ID card made for him

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.n...40357487_n.jpg


Too bad our goverment, the little obidient muts they are, would bring him to the US themselves :nope:

These terrorists all around - we are referring to - do discuss their ideas in monitored communications? The stupid ones maybe.

Even if so: Onkel Bruno kommt morgen zum vereinbarten Treffpunkt und bringt die Geburtstagstorte für Ulrike mit. Wir werden uns etwas verspäten, der Zugfahrplan hat sich seit dem letzten Jahr geändert. Ich bin mir sicher, es wird wieder eine lustige Party. Linda hat angerufen und gesagt, sie hat gestern den ganzen Tag das Gästezimmer geputzt und freut sich schon riesig. Na dann, bis morgen in alter Frische.
Tobias

I have taken some digital pictures and shared the originals with my friends directly via USB stick. I open one of these pics on my permanent offline computer, merge a grey text message layer (1% opacity) and post it at Flickr or wherever via internet café.
My partners in terror download the pic and compare it offline with their original and read the message.

2x coded communication out in the open. No way for the slap hats to find any information.
I can imagine more ways to communicate safely, even without any interest in terror acts.

All this surveillance/intelligence is NOT to catch terrorists before they commit an attack. It's just good to investigate the guys after an attack. And because everything is secret, all information can be manipulated the way it seems fit. No chance for the sovereign to check what the institutions are after. They are out of control - we call it democracy.
No camera can prevent a crime, it just can observe it.

Did the Boston bombers communicate with Chechenia? They were even suspects...

If someone is suspected to be a terrorist, it would be ok to check his communication. But are we all suspected to be terrorists?

Yup, we are. Our masters fear their reign to be ended by educated, well informed people, who gather at squares and chant for a new system. Watch it live!

"Governments will use whatever technology is available to combat their primary enemy – their own population." Noam Chomsky

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...s-noam-chomsky

I would not monitor everybody but only suspects, and I would never torture the Gitmo style. The only way torture may be a tool is, if there is a recognized smoking gun situation.
You know - this 24 Sutherland scenery, for the west to learn our western torture may be necessary and noble.

“In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities effectively exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.” Zbignew Brzezinski (Between Two Ages : America’s Role in the Technotronic Era, 1970)

“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values (of Liberty). Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.” Zbigniew Brzezinski (Between Two Ages, 1970)

“Society dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control.” Zbignew Brzezinski

Yes, and the stupid ones do get caught.

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2013/07/c...d-terror-plot/

Obviously not all terrorist communication will be discovered. Does this mean we give the stupid, careless and amateur ones a free hand? And what better way to prosecute them after they are caught? Or to uncover their friends?

I'm not disagreeing with you.

I would hope not. Being observed does not make you a suspect. In some ways we are all under observation and have been all along. Our parents, our teachers and our friends observe us in a non malicious way. They can't help it. Here's an example. You and I are neighbours. We see each other often and say hello. I can't do this without observing you. It is a casual thing, but I can't help noticing things about you. You are a normal person. Then one day when arriving at our homes at the same time I notice you carrying an automatic weapon into your house. The only way I would know that this is not normal behavior is by my casual observation of you before hand. I had no reason to suspect you before, because you gave no reason. Should I now ignore the fact that you are doing something unusual because of my past observation?

My question would be, how does one become a suspected terrorist without some kind of observation of his activities?

The real problem with digital surveillance and profiling (for whatever reason) is the potential for wildly inaccurate profiles being linked to identities. For instance, since I have never given facebook anything other than my real name and gender, they are constantly asking where I live, where I work etc. and making guesses based upon my use of their product. I signed in in London, or Liverpool, or Penzance because I happened to be working or visiting. For the next 6 months or so FB is like 'You live in Liverpool/London/Penzance, don't you?' :haha: obviously I let them think what they like.

Now while I find it vaguely amusing that they are selling this profile information which is largely fictitious to marketeers and advertisers whom in my view should do the decent thing and fall on their swords, there is a darker and more serious side to it. Because in some digital profile of me my gender is listed as male, I get a lot of email spam regarding penis enlargement, or bodybuilding etc... from companies I never heard of, and have no desire at all to justify their spam. Yes I have nothing to hide but you see what gets done with even the smallest tidbit of information you willingly gave them? One then has to consider the meta analysis of all of your digital behavior by which more could be gleaned than you would be willing to tell, or more pertinently the inaccurate nature of your profile (maybe someone got into my email or facebook account - maybe I let someone borrow my phone etc.) could lead someone to a false conclusion, and in the case of national security combined with new laws justified by terrorist activities the consequences of that for an innocent might be very very serious indeed.

Another concern that exacerbates the aforementioned risks is that the vast scale of this modern digital surveillance requires computer algorithms to sift and sort the vast majority of 'useless' information using key words, phrases etc. and you can't program a computer to adequately determine 'context' so again I see a huge risk for innocent individuals being flagged up for whatever investigation, or pre-emptive controls (cancelled visas, frozen bank accounts, incarceration etc.) are deemed an appropriate response by the governing authority. Not to mention the possibility of digital character assassination...

The 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' argument swings both ways here. If this ultra surveillance is purely for the national interest, I'm sure most people would be happy to divulge a certain amount of personal information (if only to avoid the otherwise likely inaccuracy of their profile) but the fact that it was being attempted in absolute secrecy suggests to me that this is not the whole story. Why is the Obama admin reacting so furiously, could it be there is something in the middle of all this they really don't want us to know? Nothing to hide, nothing to fear huh? :nope:

Seems to me that this Snowden chap is simply an American who still believes - you know, land of the free, home of the brave. Naive? certainly, he's young. Foolish? very possibly. Brave? no question. If I were American I would be proud to call him my countryman. The amount you folks go on about your rights and freedoms (something I sincerely admire) I am surprised at the rather limited support for this young, naive, and brave man. If for no other reason than he has shown us all that it is still possible for 1 man to stand up to a modern financial empire, with all its jaw dropping power. If he and people like him are censored or disappeared and you don't get the nod about what is actually going on you can bet before long that diminishing possibility will disappear forever.

The possible implications of what could be done with such a vast database of constantly updated profiles on a large majority of a population are mind boggling and sinister. It doesn't take much imagination either, what if your profile contains political leanings? local media can be manipulated to attempt to sway the general opinion in your locality. Ultimately it can be used to control your mind, in a way you'd have absolutely no defense against.

“The elite ruling class wants us asleep so we’ll remain a docile, apathetic herd of passive consumers, and non-participants in the true agenda of our governments–which is to keep us separate, and present an image of a world filled with unresolvable problems...Just stay asleep America, keep watching TV.”

Bill Hicks - from his deathbed.

Bravo sammi,
You couldn't have made the situation any more clear and concise than that.:up:
The powers that be want Snowden because he noticed they were wearing their belt quite loose and he snuck up and pantsed them.:haha:
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/b...washington.jpg

Daddy no likey!