"We can still change this mess by voting in people that care."
And of course you actually believe that the assholes in power that are using every trick in the book to screw over the public and rob them blind, will just sit back and let "people that care" take over their positions of power and ruin "this thing of theirs" because the sheep voted for these "people that care" instead!!
How the hell did you think "the people who don't care" got those positions of power?
The American Public voted them into office because they "thought" they were "People That Care".
Unless you're planning to put every candidate through a lie detector 6-8 times before they can run for office, you're just going to get another flock of really good liars convincing you that they really care and then screwing you over once they take office.
Gads. No wonder its so damn easy to fleece the American public, over and over and over and over.....
But the recognition of bad acting by one group (the Press), does not necessarily prevent another group (the Police) from also acting bad.
While I've no sympathy for the currently useless Truth-Free Sensational Press, regardless of its location on earth, and agree that what they did was reprehensible and deserving of massive legal punishment, the fact that they were caught will have no deterrent effect on the police breaking - or in this case, bending - the law to try and prevent themselves from being caught.
Especially if, as I said, no specific legal demand has been officially mandated that they maintain exact records, thus allowing them to pretend incompetence due to misunderstanding.
It has become standard procedure for all official agencies, when asked to release their own incriminating records, to simply claim "the dog ate my homework". Since it is an acceptable excuse for the courts, it will continue to be used, whenever official misdeeds need to be kept hidden.
"They may have gotten away with it by putting the money in their checked luggage."
Methinks ye just gave away your occupation there officer.
Your use of the term "Gotten away with it".... means you consider their actions to be criminal and that their intent was to break the law.
They committed no crime. The money was legally gained and belonged to them. Yet you state that they could have "Gotten away with it", if they'd taken a different route such as flying home rather than driving.
Of course, if you're a cop, then you likely consider the possession of pot to be more than sufficient grounds for assuming they are criminals intent on "getting away with it".
What none of these Ex-Spy-Guys are telling you however, is that the gang of cyber-terrorists they are "protecting" you from, is the gang they used to work for.
Extrapolation:
The NSA is not at all worried about its retiring employees aiding the American Business Community in keeping secrets from the NSA, because the tech that these employees bring to the table is years old and obsolete and has been replaced with stuff that can't be stopped by the methods that these ex-employees can provide.
But, because the American Business Community does not know this, its a great retirement fund for old spies to dip into, to help pay for that castle in Spain, the 120 foot yacht and that nasty nose-killing habit they picked up during stake-outs and stalking bouts.
Gods, how I hate dealing with these eavesdroppers from hell.
I think what the NSA is actually saying, is that if they were to allow a list of the specific "pleaked" documents to fall into the hands of the public, then the public would know which "pseudo-truths" had been officially planted into the NEWS, and could therefor make educated guesses at which "facts" the "pleaks" were intended to "spin" and exactly what that spin was intended to accomplish.
Thus, while the "pleaked" documents are themselves no longer classified due to their being officially released, and currently part of public awareness, the exact identity of the specific "pleaked" documents is classified to keep the public in the dark about what areas of information the government wants to alter public perceptions of through "pleaking".
Allowing the disclosure of the identity of the myriad specific "pleaks", would render the purpose - public disinformation - of the "pleaks", ineffective.
In other words, some of your tax money is being used to allow the government to legally twist reality in order to sway public perception in ways that benefit the government, (and/or some friendly corporations) and they have interpreted a law so that it lets them keep the identity of those specific lies, a secret.
"Every police force in the UK is to be asked by a parliamentary committee to reveal how many times they have secretly snooped on journalists by obtaining their telephone and email records without their consent. "
Unless every police force in the UK was officially directed to maintain exact records of all such secret surveillance actions, methinks the most common answer from most of the police forces in the UK will be:
Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Oct 8th, 2014 @ 2:33pm
To me that commercial simply points out the fact that the Feds and the Cartel have a deal.
The Feds raid the Cartel House regularly, and the Cartel raises the cost of their product (due to police interference) regularly, claiming scarcity of product.
The Feds knew it was a Cartel House, because they were just there the previous month, and the month before that and so on.
Its an economic marriage. A business model.
Both sides in the War on Drugs, earn their livelihood from the war and thus both sides wholeheartedly want the War on Drugs to continue.
Only the public (the couple who bought the house) suffer any real harm from this occupational hazard.
Drug use at its absolute worst, is a medical problem.
By making it a moral problem and making drug use and possession and manufacture illegal, we have accomplished two amazing feats.
1. We have caused to manifest an extremely lucrative contraband economy that has made millionaires and billionaires of numerous criminals world-wide, over the last half century, who have been using that money as bribes to buy immunity from prosecution, while hiring armies of men to carry out the process of marketing their wares unfettered.
Our Law Enforcement Agencies have militarized at tax payer's expense, to keep up with the Drug Dealing Joneses, but have, for half a century, lost every battle, while the "enemy" has continuously grown in size and power.
We call this a War, but only the public suffers casualties, while the warriors on both sides of the law reap massive monetary benefits.
2. We have put thousands of otherwise innocent young people in prison for self medicating and left them there as the playthings of murderers, rapists, robbers and worse. We call this morality.
As long as Law Enforcement wields the laws of morality against citizens who misuse medicines, this awful situation will continue to escalate as it has done since the day the War on Drugs was first declared. As the escalation of the losing war on drugs grows, so too will the atrocities and injustices suffered by the public escalate, as the police try harder to win a single battle.
End the War on Drugs and you end this entire cycle. End the Legislation of Morality and you end all such cycles.
As a benefit, you take away the most lucrative contraband that organized crime has ever had and cut their profits by 80-90 percent overnight, and therefor also end their ability to run the government through bribery and graft.
Drug abusers need medical attention and care. Drug users, like all other citizens, need to be protected from morality legislators.
Nah. Its just a really big country and the Chinese could not buy it all (they spent too much of their money financing the American Christian War on Muslims), so Harper needs a number of other buyers in order to finalize the whole deal before he gets thrown out of office.
Hopefully, Canadians will now realize what an asshole the man is and toss him out of office immediately.
I think he represents a really good reason to bring back tar and feathering.
What I find disheartening, is the infantile eagerness expressed by law enforcement for every single privacy violation technique they are offered by the new Anti-Terrorism and Cyber Crime Industries.
As soon as remote devises that can measure heart rate and perspiration and such, simply by pointing them at a suspect are possible, we can assume that Law Enforcement will fall all over itself in its rush to incorporate them into its arsenal of citizen surveillance tools and techniques, because then no public endorsement will be needed or considered.
Shortly thereafter, similar static devices will be mounted in appropriate positions in all government and corporate buildings. Added to facial recognition, voice recognition and DNA analysis systems, the LEOs will begin to feel omnipotent in their ability to enforce the law.
Catch bad guys... not so much...
By then, "the law" will be fully rewritten by the bad guys in white hats, to protect only the bad guys in white hats, leaving John Q. Public to take the rap for all future crimes.
Methinks we are simply looking in the wrong direction when we seek out the "Cyber-Terrorists".
If Cyber Terrorism, is defined as scaring the bejeezums out of folks, through clandestine theft and willful misuse of their private data by tapping into their (cyber)communications devices, then we really need look no further than our own government and its various agencies and affiliates such as Law Enforcement.
Who needs foreign terrorists when we have the Human Rights ignoring and Constitution violating USG, right here at home.
"...the public is too stupid to understand this tech proposal and is only mocking it because it's viewing the video without the proper expertise or context."
Sounds like the deal was going to be another top secret surveillance technique sold to the public as a secure safety system, with only the important parts - like total privacy forfeiture - left out of the publicly known details.
Whenever "the public is too stupid to understand the proposal", it usually just means that the public was not going to be privy to those specific details, because they would see only the privacy violation aspect of it all and complain.
The police on the other hand would understand those particular aspects completely and consider the public privacy violations as the best part of the proposal.
Yep. I believe him completely when he says the video was not intended for public consumption. Not ever.
Funny thing how, in a fascist run society, secret public privacy violation becomes just another big business model.
Its already started and its a pretty big campaign actually.
This morning's news had a long piece about a cop who "pimped out his wife" and sold drugs, among other crimes, and was caught ONLY because investigators had the use of "the backdoor" to read his incriminating emails.
The spokesman (I missed his name) claimed they "would never have caught the guy" if his cell phone had the new full encryption that was planned to be put in place by Google and Apple and other manufacturers soon.
It really does seem to be that the cops are going to claim repeatedly that lack of encryption is essential to the capture of criminals. I guess before cell phones, criminals had to arrest themselves and confess on paper before the cops could catch them.
You can't really blame the bad guys in white hats for trying to prevent encryption though. After all, they've spent millions of tax payer's dollars and many years making sure that Americans have the least secure communications on earth.
A step forward for the public is a step backwards for the folks in law enforcement, because then they would have to go back to using barbaric detective work, savage investigation analysis and old fashioned common sense.
Techniques which apparently, never worked and never caught any bad guys.
Methinks that particular anonymous coward posting above was really a paid advertisement by the Fox TV network and should thus be considered as being designed to be entirely misleading. :)
Sadly such laws are always graded as 100 by the regimes that initiate and enforce them.
Sadder still is the number and frequency of such laws throughout human history, when compared to the miniscule rulings that actually attempt to protect human rights.
On the post: Ron Wyden, Tech Company Execs To Discuss The Impact Of NSA Surveillance On The Digital Economy
Re: Mouth Wash...
"We can still change this mess by voting in people that care."
And of course you actually believe that the assholes in power that are using every trick in the book to screw over the public and rob them blind, will just sit back and let "people that care" take over their positions of power and ruin "this thing of theirs" because the sheep voted for these "people that care" instead!!
How the hell did you think "the people who don't care" got those positions of power?
The American Public voted them into office because they "thought" they were "People That Care".
Unless you're planning to put every candidate through a lie detector 6-8 times before they can run for office, you're just going to get another flock of really good liars convincing you that they really care and then screwing you over once they take office.
Gads. No wonder its so damn easy to fleece the American public, over and over and over and over.....
---
On the post: UK Police Abuse Of Anti-Terrorist Snooping Powers To Reveal Journalists' Sources Leads To Widespread Calls For Reform
Re: Re: The dog ate my homework!!!
But the recognition of bad acting by one group (the Press), does not necessarily prevent another group (the Police) from also acting bad.
While I've no sympathy for the currently useless Truth-Free Sensational Press, regardless of its location on earth, and agree that what they did was reprehensible and deserving of massive legal punishment, the fact that they were caught will have no deterrent effect on the police breaking - or in this case, bending - the law to try and prevent themselves from being caught.
Especially if, as I said, no specific legal demand has been officially mandated that they maintain exact records, thus allowing them to pretend incompetence due to misunderstanding.
It has become standard procedure for all official agencies, when asked to release their own incriminating records, to simply claim "the dog ate my homework". Since it is an acceptable excuse for the courts, it will continue to be used, whenever official misdeeds need to be kept hidden.
In my opinion only of course. :)
---
On the post: Iowan 'Drug Interdiction' Officers Legally Steal $100K From Poker Players Passing Through Their State
Re: Something seems fishy to me also
Methinks ye just gave away your occupation there officer.
Your use of the term "Gotten away with it".... means you consider their actions to be criminal and that their intent was to break the law.
They committed no crime. The money was legally gained and belonged to them. Yet you state that they could have "Gotten away with it", if they'd taken a different route such as flying home rather than driving.
Of course, if you're a cop, then you likely consider the possession of pot to be more than sufficient grounds for assuming they are criminals intent on "getting away with it".
Methinks that fish is in your pocket.
---
On the post: Tech Execs Express Extreme Concern That NSA Surveillance Could Lead To 'Breaking' The Internet
If it aint broke...
No, no, no! Not "breaking" the Internet.
"Fixing!" the Internet, don't you see.
Because its not "controlled" by authority, its already broken. In fact, its always been broken.
You cannot have an un-owned, uncontrolled public inter-active communications network in an Ownership Society.
The boys just want to "fix" it, the way they fixed TV, Radio and the Newspapers.
---
On the post: More Abuse Of The Orphan Drug System: Taking Treatment From Free To $80,000 A Year
Answer: 3-7 years minimum, to insure maximized profits.
How many politicians does it take to close an obvious loop hole in law?
Divided by;
How many politicians can a drug company bribe per year with all of the free money its making from the loop hole?
---
On the post: Former DHS Official Announces Plan To Sell Cyberattack Insurance
Retirement plan for successful thieves
Extrapolation:
The NSA is not at all worried about its retiring employees aiding the American Business Community in keeping secrets from the NSA, because the tech that these employees bring to the table is years old and obsolete and has been replaced with stuff that can't be stopped by the methods that these ex-employees can provide.
But, because the American Business Community does not know this, its a great retirement fund for old spies to dip into, to help pay for that castle in Spain, the 120 foot yacht and that nasty nose-killing habit they picked up during stake-outs and stalking bouts.
---
On the post: NSA Says Secrets It Leaked To The Press Are Too Secret To Be Disclosed Publicly
Twisty beggars aint they....
I think what the NSA is actually saying, is that if they were to allow a list of the specific "pleaked" documents to fall into the hands of the public, then the public would know which "pseudo-truths" had been officially planted into the NEWS, and could therefor make educated guesses at which "facts" the "pleaks" were intended to "spin" and exactly what that spin was intended to accomplish.
Thus, while the "pleaked" documents are themselves no longer classified due to their being officially released, and currently part of public awareness, the exact identity of the specific "pleaked" documents is classified to keep the public in the dark about what areas of information the government wants to alter public perceptions of through "pleaking".
Allowing the disclosure of the identity of the myriad specific "pleaks", would render the purpose - public disinformation - of the "pleaks", ineffective.
In other words, some of your tax money is being used to allow the government to legally twist reality in order to sway public perception in ways that benefit the government, (and/or some friendly corporations) and they have interpreted a law so that it lets them keep the identity of those specific lies, a secret.
Nothing new here.
---
On the post: UK Police Abuse Of Anti-Terrorist Snooping Powers To Reveal Journalists' Sources Leads To Widespread Calls For Reform
The dog ate my homework!!!
Unless every police force in the UK was officially directed to maintain exact records of all such secret surveillance actions, methinks the most common answer from most of the police forces in the UK will be:
"Umm, no idea. We didn't actually keep records."
---
On the post: SWAT Team Raids House And Kills Homeowner Because Criminal Who Burglarized The House Told Them To
Re:
Sadly, because the criminals happen to be cops, we will never be allowed to know the truth of this affair.
On the post: SWAT Team Raids House And Kills Homeowner Because Criminal Who Burglarized The House Told Them To
Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Oct 8th, 2014 @ 2:33pm
The Feds raid the Cartel House regularly, and the Cartel raises the cost of their product (due to police interference) regularly, claiming scarcity of product.
The Feds knew it was a Cartel House, because they were just there the previous month, and the month before that and so on.
Its an economic marriage. A business model.
Both sides in the War on Drugs, earn their livelihood from the war and thus both sides wholeheartedly want the War on Drugs to continue.
Only the public (the couple who bought the house) suffer any real harm from this occupational hazard.
---
On the post: SWAT Team Raids House And Kills Homeowner Because Criminal Who Burglarized The House Told Them To
End the War on Common Sense
By making it a moral problem and making drug use and possession and manufacture illegal, we have accomplished two amazing feats.
1. We have caused to manifest an extremely lucrative contraband economy that has made millionaires and billionaires of numerous criminals world-wide, over the last half century, who have been using that money as bribes to buy immunity from prosecution, while hiring armies of men to carry out the process of marketing their wares unfettered.
Our Law Enforcement Agencies have militarized at tax payer's expense, to keep up with the Drug Dealing Joneses, but have, for half a century, lost every battle, while the "enemy" has continuously grown in size and power.
We call this a War, but only the public suffers casualties, while the warriors on both sides of the law reap massive monetary benefits.
2. We have put thousands of otherwise innocent young people in prison for self medicating and left them there as the playthings of murderers, rapists, robbers and worse. We call this morality.
As long as Law Enforcement wields the laws of morality against citizens who misuse medicines, this awful situation will continue to escalate as it has done since the day the War on Drugs was first declared. As the escalation of the losing war on drugs grows, so too will the atrocities and injustices suffered by the public escalate, as the police try harder to win a single battle.
End the War on Drugs and you end this entire cycle.
End the Legislation of Morality and you end all such cycles.
As a benefit, you take away the most lucrative contraband that organized crime has ever had and cut their profits by 80-90 percent overnight, and therefor also end their ability to run the government through bribery and graft.
Drug abusers need medical attention and care.
Drug users, like all other citizens, need to be protected from morality legislators.
---
On the post: EU-Canada Trade Agreement 'Celebrated', Text Officially Released; Even Worse Than Feared
Re:
Hopefully, Canadians will now realize what an asshole the man is and toss him out of office immediately.
I think he represents a really good reason to bring back tar and feathering.
--
On the post: EU-Canada Trade Agreement 'Celebrated', Text Officially Released; Even Worse Than Feared
The Cat has left the bag.
Way to go Germany!!!
On the post: Dutch IT Contractor Suggests Letting Police Have Direct Real-Time Access To All Of Your Devices... For Your Safety
Re: Re: The Future
---
On the post: Dutch IT Contractor Suggests Letting Police Have Direct Real-Time Access To All Of Your Devices... For Your Safety
The Future
As soon as remote devises that can measure heart rate and perspiration and such, simply by pointing them at a suspect are possible, we can assume that Law Enforcement will fall all over itself in its rush to incorporate them into its arsenal of citizen surveillance tools and techniques, because then no public endorsement will be needed or considered.
Shortly thereafter, similar static devices will be mounted in appropriate positions in all government and corporate buildings. Added to facial recognition, voice recognition and DNA analysis systems, the LEOs will begin to feel omnipotent in their ability to enforce the law.
Catch bad guys... not so much...
By then, "the law" will be fully rewritten by the bad guys in white hats, to protect only the bad guys in white hats, leaving John Q. Public to take the rap for all future crimes.
Fascist Dream number 32002.
---
On the post: Dutch IT Contractor Suggests Letting Police Have Direct Real-Time Access To All Of Your Devices... For Your Safety
Re:
If Cyber Terrorism, is defined as scaring the bejeezums out of folks, through clandestine theft and willful misuse of their private data by tapping into their (cyber)communications devices, then we really need look no further than our own government and its various agencies and affiliates such as Law Enforcement.
Who needs foreign terrorists when we have the Human Rights ignoring and Constitution violating USG, right here at home.
---
On the post: Dutch IT Contractor Suggests Letting Police Have Direct Real-Time Access To All Of Your Devices... For Your Safety
Bad Guys in White Hats, everywhere!
Sounds like the deal was going to be another top secret surveillance technique sold to the public as a secure safety system, with only the important parts - like total privacy forfeiture - left out of the publicly known details.
Whenever "the public is too stupid to understand the proposal", it usually just means that the public was not going to be privy to those specific details, because they would see only the privacy violation aspect of it all and complain.
The police on the other hand would understand those particular aspects completely and consider the public privacy violations as the best part of the proposal.
Yep. I believe him completely when he says the video was not intended for public consumption. Not ever.
Funny thing how, in a fascist run society, secret public privacy violation becomes just another big business model.
---
On the post: Washington Post's Clueless Editorial On Phone Encryption: No Backdoors, But How About A Magical 'Golden Key'?
Social Engineering
This morning's news had a long piece about a cop who "pimped out his wife" and sold drugs, among other crimes, and was caught ONLY because investigators had the use of "the backdoor" to read his incriminating emails.
The spokesman (I missed his name) claimed they "would never have caught the guy" if his cell phone had the new full encryption that was planned to be put in place by Google and Apple and other manufacturers soon.
It really does seem to be that the cops are going to claim repeatedly that lack of encryption is essential to the capture of criminals. I guess before cell phones, criminals had to arrest themselves and confess on paper before the cops could catch them.
You can't really blame the bad guys in white hats for trying to prevent encryption though. After all, they've spent millions of tax payer's dollars and many years making sure that Americans have the least secure communications on earth.
A step forward for the public is a step backwards for the folks in law enforcement, because then they would have to go back to using barbaric detective work, savage investigation analysis and old fashioned common sense.
Techniques which apparently, never worked and never caught any bad guys.
---
On the post: Why Won't The Press Admit That CIA Director John Brennan Lied?
Re: Re:
On the post: How The Rule Of Law Is Actually Undermining Human Rights
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sadder still is the number and frequency of such laws throughout human history, when compared to the miniscule rulings that actually attempt to protect human rights.
Ah well, Hope Springs Eternal.
Next >>