I thought people understood that the law enforcement officials have been at this game for centuries...
If the police doing executions and having them sanctioned later, the DoJ willing to hesitate to put Greenwald, a journalist, into jail, the CIA doing corporate espionage on friendly countries, the NSA willing to spy on anyone and everyone, the extrajudicial killings of drone strikes by the president, or the many other myriads of problems weren't an indicator that things are wrong...
I don't know how to show you that America has some deep structural problems it can't quite face.
Okay, so let's think about the past 30 or 40 years... The telcos have been consolidating to remain the dominant market holders even though they've been broken up thanks to everything before the Carter administration.
What does this surveillance give them?
That's what I have to think about. This surveillance ensures that they have a government monopoly that serves their purposes. They can impede on competition such as local internet access which I'm sure is what happened in Wisconson with their local internet.
So where would I look? I'd have to see if there's any collusion occurring between the CEOs and government through corruption laundering. I may just look into this in the near future given how the incentives are matching up to basically protect AT&T and Verizon mainly.
With their connections to the government that have occurred since the 80s, it's hard to ignore that the laws have indeed been changed to protect the companies such as requiring every cell phone to be bought with a driver's license and ID.
So honestly... Who are the laws currently protecting? The public, or the telcos?
This is a helluva lot bigger than people should be expecting. Microsoft is asking for customer's data on their Xbox One. Now you're telling the same people that if they give their addresses and their other products, that's basically going to harm their reputation.
There is NO point to get the Xbone. They take money from private marketers to make more money.
And now you're telling me that as a company, that has multiple products, you can't get your bean counters to work to make the user experience better?
Re: Re: So long as the 1% Rich believe, nothing will change.
I actually HATE to substantiate his arguments, but he does have a point.
There are two things that can happen with the austerity we're seeing now. One is that we can tax the richest people, who are going to try to hide their money as much as they can in offshore bank accounts and whatnot.
The other thing we can do is borrow the money from the rich, which has to be paid back in interest.
Let's remember that higher taxation on the wealthiest Americans would help our deficit by forcing the rich to pay their fair share. I recall that corporations pay 0% in taxes through all of the loopholes when they buy politicians to lobby for the loopholes and launder corruption.
So yes, we need a 100% tax rate for the richest Americans. IE, a maximum income. The government then uses that money for job creation, road repairment, and other needs. FDR did that in 1932 thanks to pressure on him from grassroots activism.
If we borrow the money, we have to pay the loan to people that haven't paid their fair share. It's a great shell game, but it causes the very same problems that came with the 2007 crash.
So it comes down to which we should do... Tax or borrow?
I'm reading this story and I have to wonder. Why do these people continue to believe the information is safe and secure?
The fact that it's apparently not that difficult to get NSA employees to cough up their login info shows that for all the talk of careful review, audits, limits and security -- humans remain a very weak link, and there are all sorts of ways to get at information even if the NSA believes it's locked down and carefully monitored.
Okay. Here's my suggestion for this. If you all want that information, you have to watch it 24-7. It's that simple. We get Diane Feinstein, James Clapper, Keith Alexander, and anyone else supporting this into the big room to make SURE it's safe. They remove all suspicion when they're the ones being monitored with this and can show how all the info is under lock and key. They go through each step. Bit by bit.
They remain in the room to show us how this can help save lives. They remain in that one room to maintain national security.
That's my suggestion. You keep them in the room with the information that they have to watch. No senatorial duties, no general duties, and no administrative duties. They just watch the information for national security.
Meanwhile, we can fix the problems they brought up by making these programs much more secure and transparent. They can look, they just can't touch.
Tapio's company Mental Capital Care received 790,000 euro in funding from Finnish investment board Tekes last year to test out a game designed to cure the symptoms of ADHD.
Perhaps there's a different perception to ADHD that should be explored.
One of the people I follow would be Thom Hartmann who has a number of books on the issue of ADHD. He explains it to be a gene that people are born with.
It may explain the types of hypersensitivity that certain individuals have in different arenas to which they have to learn how to adapt to a different environment to one that our omnivorous ancestors grew up in.
It would be very intriguing if they picked up the research and saw if it worked for what they needed it for.
Look, when Germany had their 1932 (33?) moment in Reichenstad(?) where a "terrorist" bombed a building, that was a moment when they needed to combine the efforts of all of their intelligence. Germany also had their prime minister nominated, not elected. And he kept doing things against the wishes of the people. When the SS was created, it had the exact same mission to protect the Homeland while doing more questionable things as the World geared up for WWII.
We call it the SS now but that was their Department of Homeland Security.
It's been a colossal failure to have all of the LEOs under one roof. It's more of a failure that this bureacracy hides so much information from its citizens while trying to stamp down on their rights.
We're truly looking tyranny in the face and all it can do is ask for a standard 4-51C paper to file.
TB has drama from his time on Reddit. He can be quite controversial and opinionated and has done things like get his fans to massively downvote people that disagree with him. That's changed since he stayed off Reddit (he has a Starcraft team that he is taking care of which he doesn't want to catch his flack) so it essentially worked out for him to stay away from some drama.
David Cameron has encouraged a Commons select committee to investigate whether the Guardian has broken the law or damaged national security by publishing secrets leaked by the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.
I've read that statement over and over and over again, and I still don't see what the double standard is. Both involve reporting on things of public interest, which, last I checked, is exactly what news organizations are supposed to do.
Mike, it's pure confirmation bias. Cameron is working with an assumption that he believes is a fact. It's what makes him dangerous because he's an authoritarian looking for heads to bust. Your logic and facts are invalid. You've slighted him by exposing the schemes he's had on national security.
That's what his agenda truly is. Cover up the crimes while he's in charge so that it doesn't come to bite him and there's no accountability for his lack of concern for his nation's needs.