It is always difficult for those whose heads are under water, to fathom, let alone believe that the men above pumping air down the hose, might want them dead simply for the contents of their wallets, left above in the pumper's safe keeping.
For someone who has been opining for years now on this blog, without ever offering anything remotely resembling "empirical evidence" in support of your opinions, methinks ye do indeed be waxing more facetious than normal.
Did something said above strike a nerve? :)
PS: Blog = b-log = Bitch Log, not empirical data repository
"Prohibition clearly didn't work for booze any more than it did for birth control pills and abortion."
That actually depends on what you mean by the word "work".
If by "work" you mean "prevent the use of, or practice of", well then you're absolutely right - prohibition does not work, ever.
Its pretty much impossible to legislate morality effectively and prohibition is always about trying to legally prevent some people from doing something that some other people do not like.
However, if by "work", you mean give the powers that be the ability and opportunity to pass new laws that strip people of their rights and make arrest and seizure an easy, lucrative method for profiteering by law enforcement agencies, politicians, lawyers and other power parasites, then you would be completely wrong.
When it comes to making power parasites, police and government agencies rich and powerful by removing rights from the population, legally, the only thing that works better than Prohibition, is War.
Like all the War On scams, prohibition always fails to do what it is supposed to do, insuring both that the prohibited practice continues being practiced by the public, and thus that the laws pertaining to that prohibition will escalate towards more and more draconian and rights-killing legal measures to continue the fake "fight against" that prohibited practice.
Prohibition, like all "War On" scams is initiated specifically to eliminate human rights and make government stronger legally and its members rich through graft and asset seizures.
"What's the chances that it is stored in plaintext and accessible to every other national or industrial spy that wants a peek?"
Its probably minimally encrypted, because then "every other national or industrial spy that wants a peek", needs to pay the CIAF BIN SADOJ's transfer charges for their desired data packs.
They are doing this for the money after all - any money.
Since they're obviously unconcerned about terrorists, criminals and other spy agencies as far as being bad guys needing justice, then these other entities are most likely just customers needing data.
Its a matter of "Ka-ching", rather than one of "catching" any crooks.
Have you looked at the crew currently running for POTUS?
That's the top government job.
Is it any wonder then that the lower government jobs are held by morons, idiots and the massively stupid.
Somebody should implement some sort of public vote system that can weed out the jerks.... oh yeah, that's right, we already have a government-run version of that kind of system... never mind.
Its Cocaine and Bimbo time for the Yacht Clubbers again..
"A Month Ago, Dianne Feinstein Said Cybersecurity Was Super Important... Now She Says We Should Undermine Encryption
Well yeah, its Christmas Bonus Graft Time and she wants to get hers, just like all the rest of the wall street employees wandering the halls of government.
So its time to toe the line and play ball, if she wants to get that $100,000 bonus the CIAF BIN SADOJ sends out each year at this time for non-naughty team players.
Yep, they hate the USA because we have SUVs and color TVs.
Ask any moron, and they'll dutifully regurgitate this pathetic propaganda meme every time, because its the only answer - delivered daily via TV by such geniuses as Ben Carson and Donald Trump - that makes Americans look like the good guys in a war the USG created, against an enemy the USG manufactured.
The fact that the USA has bombed a few nations into the stone age who DID NOT thereafter field terrorists, only means that the bombing and the follow up extermination and elimination of social infrastructure like power and water, was extremely successful.
"And while the group's behavior has been held up by Presidential candidates like Ben Carson as a "model" of how to deal with terrorist groups..."
While I have long suspected that the "silence" echoing from the halls of justice concerning anonymous meant that the CIAF BIN SADOJ had finally infiltrated the 'dis'-organization, this comment from one of the looniest assholes to ever stand up and be counted is in my opinion, proof that Anonymous is utterly useless and its roster has been generally replaced with CIAF BNIN SADOJ operatives.
If Ben Carson says Anonymous is an effective tool against terrorism, then Anonymous is just another malfunctioning branch of the federal government now.
Cops were only after the cash anyway and I'm pretty sure that while the tainted evidence gained illegally by cops will make taking the "perps" to court impossible - saving the cops untold hours of actual investigative and clerical labor - it will have no bearing at all on the legal guilt of the evil money they "arrested".
Everyone knows that money gathered through the Asset Forfeiture Program is always guilty until divvied up and spent by duly authorized members of a local or federal police force.
So, all in all, just another win-win situation for the crooked Sherriff of Nottingham LEOs and the Reverse Robin Hood Program.
Eliminating the ability to "follow the money trail" has been among the federal government's top priorities over the last two decades.
If she is actually as smart as you propose, perhaps she is also smart enough to hide such contributions via private agencies or whatever vehicles the legal eagles have created for the purposes of dark money transfers and election control.
Its not often, for instance, that the Koch boys give directly to a candidate, when so many protected hidden brown bag detours are available that leave no obvious paper trail.
In my opinion, the question is not "Is she taking 'contributions' from Booz Allen, etc..", so much as how much money has she received so far from such groups via dark money routes.
That she is taking it goes without saying.
What politician turns down free money from any source?
Sadly, dark money donators have built quite an effective underground banking system and the laws have been bent just enough to maintain their viability and the anonymity of their benefactors.
It is more than likely that we will never know who her true backers are.
I don't think it really matters though, as the POTUS has already been selected - just not yet introduced - and the campaign money this year is more about the No-Possible-Way Clown Candidate Troupe putting on a good anti-voter circus performance, to insure the voters will be ready to accept anything that even slightly resembles a non-clown candidate.
What is the latest possible date for announcing a candidacy for POTUS. That's about the time when we will meet the new Boss, methinks.
I think Hillary is being polished shiny in the press, because the real POTUS to be, is a female and corporate america's public relations department knows that America has to be groomed to accept a female president, exactly like they were groomed to accept a black man for president.
"Sounds like a case of,"You give us money and we make it go away.""
Well, no, actually... not really.
Because eventually the imprisoned text is published - usually the following monday - in my case anyways.
Its more of a "naughty, naughty, slap your fingers" kinda thing as far as I can fathom.
Or, its just a silly bot that nobody can be bothered to remove, that was long ago used to prevent foul language, religious slurs, or sexual innuendoes from reaching the eyes of the unwashed masses. A ghost in the machine.
As I said, because the rulers of techdirt are struck dumb and type-less by any mention of this anomaly, we are unlikely to ever know the actual cause, or learn how to avoid it.
We don't want no creeps wit camraz to come with - less they makin a snuff flik
I'll betcha the MAFIA feels exactly the same way.
In fact "When you engage in that type of mission, it wasn’t intended to be pretty and it won’t be pretty." describes the job that mob enforcers have to do also.
"We should be going after the corruption and the corrupters in order to gain back democratic control of our government."
I think the vast majority of Americans would be with you on that, if....
- they had someone, some agency to turn to, who could legally do all the things you listed - but its hard to convince or force those who are corrupted - the government officials in charge of doing these things - to punish those who are corrupting them with gifts of yachts, cocaine and bimbos - the government's corporate owners and directors.
- they had even a smallest bit of trust/faith in the vote process, which, as had been said before, if it were effective in procuring good government, would be illegal. Not to mention that the people running for office are; almost without exception, criminals running for office specifically because of the corruption available for personal gain and who have no intention of shooting the goose that lays golden eggs at their feet.
- they could imagine some possible legal means of making those profiting from the chaos and insanity, stop manufacturing the chaos and insanity.
For instance, how does one go about removing an oligarchy, when that entity is not even officially recognized as existing, and whose existence is indeed denied by all the officials who are supposed to be in charge of preventing exactly that sort of thing from occurring?
While I agree that once you understand the problem, the solutions become clear, I also have to point out that those standard solutions - remove the corruptors - are almost impossible to institute when the very structure of the legal system has been infiltrated and altered from within by the very people you wish to remove.
You cannot attack an issue without the right sort of weapon, or those for whom the issues equate to profit and power, will simply put you away, legally, and through their control of the media, make you look like the bad guy.
ie. Snowden.
Offer some actual solutions for debate and methinks the public will happily follow, if they appear to be doable solutions.
As far as I can tell, its an automated process, and that depends on something like a data base of offending words and phrases that is probably hard coded in the wares.
As I said, the techies at techdirt will not respond to inquiries about this process - probably because it is censorship and techdirt prides itself on its openness.
However, because it is a "bot", it could actually be something as silly as the fact that your handle contains the letters "c y a n" and the word "cyanide" might be listed in the bot - for whatever reason - as offending.
If this post is held for moderation, that will be a clue. :)
On the post: Citizen Arrested While Filming A Political Rally Indicted By Grand Jury... Just After She Announces Her Plan To Sue Those Involved
Re: citizen arrested while filming
The real question then, is, "do any cops know this fact?"
I think not.
---
On the post: The Paris Attacks Were An Intelligence Community Failure, Not An 'Encryption' Problem
Re: Re:
---
On the post: The Paris Attacks Were An Intelligence Community Failure, Not An 'Encryption' Problem
Re:
Folks, I'd like you to meet Mister Donald "toupee" Trump.
He wants to be your President.
He'll show them barbaric brown Muzzelums what for, cuz as POTUS, he'll have nukes galore and the balls to use 'em.
---
On the post: The Anonymous Assault On ISIS Is Hurting More Than It's Helping
Re:
Did something said above strike a nerve? :)
PS: Blog = b-log = Bitch Log, not empirical data repository
---
On the post: California Police Used Illegal Wiretap Warrants In Hundreds Of Drug Prosecutions
Re:
That actually depends on what you mean by the word "work".
If by "work" you mean "prevent the use of, or practice of", well then you're absolutely right - prohibition does not work, ever.
Its pretty much impossible to legislate morality effectively and prohibition is always about trying to legally prevent some people from doing something that some other people do not like.
However, if by "work", you mean give the powers that be the ability and opportunity to pass new laws that strip people of their rights and make arrest and seizure an easy, lucrative method for profiteering by law enforcement agencies, politicians, lawyers and other power parasites, then you would be completely wrong.
When it comes to making power parasites, police and government agencies rich and powerful by removing rights from the population, legally, the only thing that works better than Prohibition, is War.
Like all the War On scams, prohibition always fails to do what it is supposed to do, insuring both that the prohibited practice continues being practiced by the public, and thus that the laws pertaining to that prohibition will escalate towards more and more draconian and rights-killing legal measures to continue the fake "fight against" that prohibited practice.
Prohibition, like all "War On" scams is initiated specifically to eliminate human rights and make government stronger legally and its members rich through graft and asset seizures.
It is not intended to "work" any other way.
---
On the post: Documents: The Domestic Email Collection Program The NSA 'Killed' In 2011 Was Actually Just Offshored
Re: Um... if this data is offshore...
Its probably minimally encrypted, because then "every other national or industrial spy that wants a peek", needs to pay the CIAF BIN SADOJ's transfer charges for their desired data packs.
They are doing this for the money after all - any money.
Since they're obviously unconcerned about terrorists, criminals and other spy agencies as far as being bad guys needing justice, then these other entities are most likely just customers needing data.
Its a matter of "Ka-ching", rather than one of "catching" any crooks.
---
On the post: Telegraph Publishes The Dumbest Article On Encryption You'll Ever Read... Written By David Cameron's Former Speechwriter
Re: Re: Re: Good guys vs. Bad guys.
So true. TPP and its ilk will insure that.
Ah well, I'll just change a couple words slightly then - like "blows" for "fellates". That should do it.
---
On the post: A Month Ago, Dianne Feinstein Said Cybersecurity Was Super Important... Now She Says We Should Undermine Encryption
Re:
That's the top government job.
Is it any wonder then that the lower government jobs are held by morons, idiots and the massively stupid.
Somebody should implement some sort of public vote system that can weed out the jerks.... oh yeah, that's right, we already have a government-run version of that kind of system... never mind.
----
On the post: A Month Ago, Dianne Feinstein Said Cybersecurity Was Super Important... Now She Says We Should Undermine Encryption
Its Cocaine and Bimbo time for the Yacht Clubbers again..
Well yeah, its Christmas Bonus Graft Time and she wants to get hers, just like all the rest of the wall street employees wandering the halls of government.
So its time to toe the line and play ball, if she wants to get that $100,000 bonus the CIAF BIN SADOJ sends out each year at this time for non-naughty team players.
---
On the post: The Anonymous Assault On ISIS Is Hurting More Than It's Helping
Re: Re: Causes of Daesh recruitment
Ask any moron, and they'll dutifully regurgitate this pathetic propaganda meme every time, because its the only answer - delivered daily via TV by such geniuses as Ben Carson and Donald Trump - that makes Americans look like the good guys in a war the USG created, against an enemy the USG manufactured.
The fact that the USA has bombed a few nations into the stone age who DID NOT thereafter field terrorists, only means that the bombing and the follow up extermination and elimination of social infrastructure like power and water, was extremely successful.
---
On the post: The Anonymous Assault On ISIS Is Hurting More Than It's Helping
Divide and Conquer, from Within.
While I have long suspected that the "silence" echoing from the halls of justice concerning anonymous meant that the CIAF BIN SADOJ had finally infiltrated the 'dis'-organization, this comment from one of the looniest assholes to ever stand up and be counted is in my opinion, proof that Anonymous is utterly useless and its roster has been generally replaced with CIAF BNIN SADOJ operatives.
If Ben Carson says Anonymous is an effective tool against terrorism, then Anonymous is just another malfunctioning branch of the federal government now.
---
On the post: California Police Used Illegal Wiretap Warrants In Hundreds Of Drug Prosecutions
The dooH niboR continues unabated.
Cops were only after the cash anyway and I'm pretty sure that while the tainted evidence gained illegally by cops will make taking the "perps" to court impossible - saving the cops untold hours of actual investigative and clerical labor - it will have no bearing at all on the legal guilt of the evil money they "arrested".
Everyone knows that money gathered through the Asset Forfeiture Program is always guilty until divvied up and spent by duly authorized members of a local or federal police force.
So, all in all, just another win-win situation for the crooked Sherriff of Nottingham LEOs and the Reverse Robin Hood Program.
---
On the post: Telegraph Publishes The Dumbest Article On Encryption You'll Ever Read... Written By David Cameron's Former Speechwriter
Re: Good guys vs. Bad guys.
Damn. Did you steal that line from somewhere??
Cuz I'm gonna steal it from you. :)
---
On the post: Hillary Clinton Joins The 'Make Silicon Valley Break Encryption' Bandwagon
Re:
If she is actually as smart as you propose, perhaps she is also smart enough to hide such contributions via private agencies or whatever vehicles the legal eagles have created for the purposes of dark money transfers and election control.
Its not often, for instance, that the Koch boys give directly to a candidate, when so many protected hidden brown bag detours are available that leave no obvious paper trail.
In my opinion, the question is not "Is she taking 'contributions' from Booz Allen, etc..", so much as how much money has she received so far from such groups via dark money routes.
That she is taking it goes without saying.
What politician turns down free money from any source?
Sadly, dark money donators have built quite an effective underground banking system and the laws have been bent just enough to maintain their viability and the anonymity of their benefactors.
It is more than likely that we will never know who her true backers are.
I don't think it really matters though, as the POTUS has already been selected - just not yet introduced - and the campaign money this year is more about the No-Possible-Way Clown Candidate Troupe putting on a good anti-voter circus performance, to insure the voters will be ready to accept anything that even slightly resembles a non-clown candidate.
What is the latest possible date for announcing a candidacy for POTUS. That's about the time when we will meet the new Boss, methinks.
I think Hillary is being polished shiny in the press, because the real POTUS to be, is a female and corporate america's public relations department knows that America has to be groomed to accept a female president, exactly like they were groomed to accept a black man for president.
---
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re:
Well, no, actually... not really.
Because eventually the imprisoned text is published - usually the following monday - in my case anyways.
Its more of a "naughty, naughty, slap your fingers" kinda thing as far as I can fathom.
Or, its just a silly bot that nobody can be bothered to remove, that was long ago used to prevent foul language, religious slurs, or sexual innuendoes from reaching the eyes of the unwashed masses. A ghost in the machine.
As I said, because the rulers of techdirt are struck dumb and type-less by any mention of this anomaly, we are unlikely to ever know the actual cause, or learn how to avoid it.
---
On the post: DOJ Says Body Camera-Wearing Cops Aren't Allowed To Partner Up With Federal Agencies
We don't want no creeps wit camraz to come with - less they makin a snuff flik
In fact "When you engage in that type of mission, it wasn’t intended to be pretty and it won’t be pretty." describes the job that mob enforcers have to do also.
---
On the post: Documents: The Domestic Email Collection Program The NSA 'Killed' In 2011 Was Actually Just Offshored
Re: Corruption is the problem, Not government.
I think the vast majority of Americans would be with you on that, if....
- they had someone, some agency to turn to, who could legally do all the things you listed - but its hard to convince or force those who are corrupted - the government officials in charge of doing these things - to punish those who are corrupting them with gifts of yachts, cocaine and bimbos - the government's corporate owners and directors.
- they had even a smallest bit of trust/faith in the vote process, which, as had been said before, if it were effective in procuring good government, would be illegal. Not to mention that the people running for office are; almost without exception, criminals running for office specifically because of the corruption available for personal gain and who have no intention of shooting the goose that lays golden eggs at their feet.
- they could imagine some possible legal means of making those profiting from the chaos and insanity, stop manufacturing the chaos and insanity.
For instance, how does one go about removing an oligarchy, when that entity is not even officially recognized as existing, and whose existence is indeed denied by all the officials who are supposed to be in charge of preventing exactly that sort of thing from occurring?
While I agree that once you understand the problem, the solutions become clear, I also have to point out that those standard solutions - remove the corruptors - are almost impossible to institute when the very structure of the legal system has been infiltrated and altered from within by the very people you wish to remove.
You cannot attack an issue without the right sort of weapon, or those for whom the issues equate to profit and power, will simply put you away, legally, and through their control of the media, make you look like the bad guy.
ie. Snowden.
Offer some actual solutions for debate and methinks the public will happily follow, if they appear to be doable solutions.
---
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: Re: automated take-downs R Us
Since they do not discuss this aspect of the site, it is unlikely we will ever know.
Good luck.
----
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: automated take-downs R Us
But it wasn't.
---
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
automated take-downs R Us
As I said, the techies at techdirt will not respond to inquiries about this process - probably because it is censorship and techdirt prides itself on its openness.
However, because it is a "bot", it could actually be something as silly as the fact that your handle contains the letters "c y a n" and the word "cyanide" might be listed in the bot - for whatever reason - as offending.
If this post is held for moderation, that will be a clue. :)
---
Next >>