1
   

FBI wants records kept of Web sites visited

 
 
manored
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 12:28 pm
@Pythagorean,
Krumple: That feels like the government trying to protect its own image. Im bad at remembering specific facts but I remember watching documentaries revealing information that was once hidden by the USA government (revealed because it was no longer necessary to hide it) and a lot of those things were hiden not for national security, but to protect the governments image, that is, make it seen more competent and moral than it really is.

I remember only one example, the project paperclip. It was a secret operation peformed by the USA government after the WW2 to snatch as many talented nazist scientists as they could before the soviets did so. Obviously, the government didnt want the public to know that they were going to be welcoming nazist scientists on american soil =)
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 01:00 pm
@manored,
manored;131470 wrote:
Krumple: That feels like the government trying to protect its own image. Im bad at remembering specific facts but I remember watching documentaries revealing information that was once hidden by the USA government (revealed because it was no longer necessary to hide it) and a lot of those things were hiden not for national security, but to protect the governments image, that is, make it seen more competent and moral than it really is.

I remember only one example, the project paperclip. It was a secret operation peformed by the USA government after the WW2 to snatch as many talented nazist scientists as they could before the soviets did so. Obviously, the government didnt want the public to know that they were going to be welcoming nazist scientists on american soil =)


Oh you are just sayin that so you won't get placed on the watch list.
SammDickens
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2010 10:33 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple;131057 wrote:
I use to think for a long time that people who spoke ill of the government were just mentally ill or old people who refused to accept change. But the more I hear, the more their concerns start to ring home. Like for example the recent Avandia stuff going on. The government has continuously tried to cover up this case, but if it wasn't for the new york times prying into the case and getting the government to hand over information we probably wouldn't have known what was going on.

The drug, prescribed for treating type two diabetes has been known to cause heart failure. There has been pushes to get the drug off the market but the pharmaceutical companies don't want to and the government has been supporting them on it the whole time. It wasn't until the new york times filed a lawsuit did they actually get the information the government knew about the drug. Here is the clincher.

The file the new york times was given had black boxed text, which is typical from the government not wanting certain other details made public so they black box it. They say they use the black boxes for upholding national security but what happened was, the file they were given had the original pdf file without the black boxes. So they could actually compare the two files and see what was suppose to be black boxed. It turns out that the so called national security information was really just a bunch of information the government didn't want the public to know. Like how much tax revenue would be lost if the drug is taken off the market. How is tax information a threat to national security?

Krumple,

There's a lot more secret activity by our government than is ever discovered. So many sub groups within various administrations and the numerous bureaucracies. You may recall all the conspiracy theories that arose after 911. Some of them weren't conspiracy theories. They were conspiracy facts. But they were buried under the mountain of crazy theories that flooded the internet and other sources during that time. If you want to cover up bizarre and criminal actions, flood the communications markets with conspiracy theories so no-one can tell the truth from fiction. Then silence every loose end.

melonkali found such a loose end after 911, a smoking gun that should have made headlines nationally but it got buried with some of the people involved. There was a female state employee with the department of safety in Memphis who was caught providing false driver's licenses for a price. Some of her customers, discovered when she was arrested, were Arabs from New York, upon whom were found work passes to the sprinkler system in the basement of the World Trade Towers dated one week before 911.

melonkali found that only licensed sprinkler technicians are allowed to work on sprinkler systems as required by fire codes, and the Trade Towers were operated by the New York Port Authority who did their own sprinkler system maintenance and repair. Furthermore, the passes were issued to a company that did not have a place of business, nor a license to work on sprinklers, nor an owner that could ever be located, a man identified as Sergei Davidenko.

The driver's license case of the four young Arab men never came to trial because the woman who issued the licenses was burned alive in her car when it ran off the road moving at very slow speed and struck a telephone pole. The inside of the car was already in flames before it ever hit the pole, and it was found that she and the inside of the car had been doused with gasoline. It was found that the car had been given to the woman by one of the young Arabs. Her death was labeled a suicide.

Two FBI agents who were working the case were taken off the case and retired from the service. Within a month, the defense attorney for the young Arabs was found shot in the head in a parking garage, a professional hit. There is more, much more, but this much I remember without reference to our files. Some internet associates in New York helped melonkali verify the bogus company in that city.

A short while later, melonkali got an anonymous message at an internet site she frequented identifying her by her real name and other personal information not available on the net. It warned her that she had become interesting to some people to whom she might not want to become any more interesting.

We have watched the loose end gradually get tied securely up, and have only been grateful that the public record of the matter did not require that melonkali be silenced.

We all know of course how the pharmaceutical companies keep their hands in the halls of congress, with wads of cash to argue their cause. It has certainly become true that we have the worst government that money can buy!

Samm
0 Replies
 
manored
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Feb, 2010 12:17 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple;131478 wrote:
Oh you are just sayin that so you won't get placed on the watch list.
Well, off course, fat stacks of cash from taxes sound like a solid reason for the government to lie, but not being blamed for allowing a deadly medicament to be sold to the public for sounds like a solid reason as well =)

May just be both.

I dont see why the pharmaceutic companies dont want to change the medicament though. Even if it never gets forbidden, now that it has this fame, whoever develops an equivalent that doesnt causes heart-failures first will gain an edge over the competition. Also, killing your clients is not a good idea, is it? =)

Maybe they dont want it to get removed until they have a replacement though, since developing medicaments takes several years.

Samm;131705 wrote:
We all know of course how the pharmaceutical companies keep their hands in the halls of congress, with wads of cash to argue their cause. It has certainly become true that we have the worst government that money can buy!
I dont live in USA but the Brazilian government is very corrupt as well (except that no one dies over it here, but the law is so flawed they just escape through the loopholes anyway). I think the only way to fight corruption is to change the mentality of the people, after all, the government comes out from the people of the country.

In other words, philosopy is the solution! =)
0 Replies
 
melonkali
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Feb, 2010 12:14 am
@Pythagorean,
As I remember, over 20 years ago investigative journalists broke the story on our pharmaceutical companies' profits, which are far above any reasonable ceiling. Journalists showed large sums of money being funneled to politicians and political parties, both sides of the aisle. Where was the public outcry then? Buried in a "lunatic fringe" and "loopy lefty" media blitz.

Predication: we'll never have real national health care, because the drug companies' profits top the list in the health care industry. Federal law prohibits U.S. citizens buying from Canadian pharmacies. You wouldn't believe what some people pay for their drugs here. 10 years ago, a hemophiliac's drugs cost around $10,000 per month -- and that's a lifelong illness. That's not an improbable figure for certain cancer or "rare disease" patients, either. In our economy, many people can't even afford $100 per month.

10 years ago, when we were involved with a group protesting to save the health care safety-net in our state (we lost the battle), one of our friends, a university professor, had to pack and move to another state. He explained to us that he'd take a job as a janitor if he had to, but the "window of opportunity" was closing for his son -- a boy with a chronic disease which the university's health care plan would not cover (that old "pre-existing condition" loophole).

There are no "free press" investigative journalists left in our country. All big and middle-sized media outlets track back to corporate ownership. I can't guess how far the Times will run with the Avandia story; since the big story broke over 20 years ago, it would be safe to throw us a "bone" on this trail to maintain the illusion of a free press.

As for the drug itself, if the pharmaceutical company is fighting to keep it on the market, you can bet dollars to dough-nuts the drug company will never be legally convicted of wrongdoing nor will it lose more than a handful of small civil suits. When they have the replacement ready, they'll take it off the market.

Another strategy commonly employed is when a drug FINALLY outlasts its patent, the company combines it with another non-patent protected drug with which it is commonly used, and voila! You have a brand new drug, all patent protected. You just have to bride the doctors and hospitals enough to prescribe it.

I know, I sound like a nut-case. But remember, I was raised in a different America, back when we had no clue about what went on "behind the scenes". When, in the 1970's, the government began declassifying secret documents, and we found out, the shock was almost a death-blow to the patriotism of many. But we rationalized that now at least the truth was out, and it would never happen again. Wrong. These days they don't even try to hide it. They don't have to. What can we do?

I can't recommend "potentially effective" independent citizen action, not in this country. I'd suggested that Samm not post about that above incident, because I know the story just makes me appear "looneytunes". I wouldn't believe it, either. Most people don't really believe how far their government will go, not until it happens to them.

After the local FBI agents both resigned, and the defense attorney, a prominent local attorney, was found shot through the head in a local parking garage, the reality of my "new America" finally sank in. I could only shut up and pray it would all blow over. I have not been involved in political action since. No doubt the experience plays a large part in my present cynicism.

BTW: re: the above mentioned "surreal" incident, all suspects were released and, of course, vanished, just like most of the "public records" and initial "local press reports" that used to be accessible on the net. The local reporter who had covered the story "moved up" to the D.C. press corps.

Wasn't that depressing?
rebecca
manored
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Feb, 2010 03:11 pm
@melonkali,
melonkali;132222 wrote:

Wasn't that depressing?
rebecca


Yes, it was =)

Ah, well, just live your life properly and hope that the world will follow, I suppose. Things only change when people change.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 06/20/2024 at 09:43:50