41
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
BillRM
 
  4  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:43 pm
@revelette2,
Quote:
If there is a connection to terrorist, then that person deserves to be on a watch lists or tracked, it would be irresponsible not to do it.


LOL like Senator Ted Kennedy who somehow found himself on the no fly list?

My theory was that someone with a sense of humor placed him on the list but in any case we have no clue why people are placed on such lists and you have no right to a hearing over being on the list. Nor do most of us have the power of a US senator to address the issue.

A free nation do not allow secret government bureaucrats to take away rights of US citizens on their whim.

Quote:
watching the news concerning Home Depot, I somehow doubt it.


From reports of Home Depot IP employees and former employees Home Depot have many months of warning about the security problems in their point of sale software and decided to roll the dice instead of addressing the problems.

Next fighting with the credit bureaus over ID theft would be far easier then trying to figure out how I could for example return from a trip to England because for some secret reasons my name is now on a no fly list.
revelette2
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 12:49 pm
@BillRM,
Singling out a few isolated incidents does your argument no favors. However, perhaps the no fly and watch lists need to refined or looked at as well as all the other stuff which is already being reformed.

I also agree that everyone should have rights to face their accuser and defend themselves against actions taken by homeland security or whoever is in charge of those things. Perhaps it will take a while, but I honestly believe that all these issues will iron out with more time with legislation and the courts.
BillRM
 
  5  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 01:04 pm
@revelette2,
Quote:
Singling out a few isolated incidents does your argument no favors.


LOL given that such a list is secret and the only way anyone find he or she is on a no fly list is when they try to board a plane there is no way to know how common or uncommon such so call isolated incidents happen to be. We could used another Snowden to released the list so we all can see if it is isolated or not problem.

An when a very famous US senator can find that he can not board a plane to return to Washington no one is safe from that happening to them and once more there is no recourse to challenge such a judgment at least unless you are a senator with the number of the head of homeland security on speed dial.

Government abuse can flower far far easier in secret then when government officers need to justify their actions in public hearings.

0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 02:46 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
but it just seems you are a bit obsessed about the government spying on you.


Government as in the US government have almost limitless resources that non-government hackers do not have and by taking a few very simple measures you can protected yourself from non-government hackers however the problem is a few magnitudes greater in dealing with 50 billions or so yearly budget government departments.

As far as double click is concern all you need to do is place the name double click in your host file so any attempts to reach double click is send to a null address and running browsers in a sandbox that is wiped every time you end a browser session will defeat even such technology as super cookies as far as tracking is concern.

No only are non-government spying far far far simpler to deal with but such outfits as double click can not decided to placed you on secret lists such as the do not fly list.

Nor when dealing with non-government hackers am I facing outfits that are using my own damn tax dollars to defect my security.

t
Quote:
he ones on the watch list, very well may not be innocent.


LOL a department of the government is not supposed to be the prosecutor, the judge and jury . Even with a judge and jury finding against you after a public hearing where you have a right to face your accuser you can appeal a verdict.

Check with the EFF or the ACLU website for the type of people that for no known have their right to travel and even return to the US interfere with.

The US is more and more beginning to resemble a totalitarian government.


Yeah...I can see how terrified you are about expressing your negative views about the country and its government.

You ought really to try that in a truly totalitarian government setting...then you would realize just how absurd that comment is.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  3  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 04:42 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I am not stupid, Olivier...not by a long shot.

Let's agree to disagree on this.

Quote:
they are paying good money to collect data that may lead to people communicating with people known to be terrorists...or terrorist sympathizers.

There is very little evidence of that. On the contrary, we know from the White House panel of experts that the NSA has never made much of a difference on any specific anti-terrorist operation.... And we also know through Snowden and co that they spied on such unlikely anti-terrorist targets as Merkel, UNICEF or the Brazil national oil company... And we also know that the NSA predates the war on terror by decades and therefore its mandate is NOT limited to anti-terrorism, far from it.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 06:18 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
I am not stupid, Olivier...not by a long shot.

Let's agree to disagree on this.


Let's agree that you have lost control, Olivier. Probably a result of all the digging you've been doing.
Quote:

Quote:
they are paying good money to collect data that may lead to people communicating with people known to be terrorists...or terrorist sympathizers.

There is very little evidence of that.


We do not normally furnish evidence of how we spy; the reason we spy; or the efficacy of our spying, Olivier. Learn to live with that. It is not going to change.


Quote:
On the contrary, we know from the White House panel of experts that the NSA has never made much of a difference on any specific anti-terrorist operation....


Ahhh...another example of someone who questions the veracity of damn near everything coming from our government...but agreeing to the truth furnished in an instance which seems to bolster a position you are taking.

Very hypocritical.




Quote:
And we also know through Snowden and co that they spied on such unlikely anti-terrorist targets as Merkel, UNICEF or the Brazil national oil company... And we also know that the NSA predates the war on terror by decades and therefore its mandate is NOT limited to anti-terrorism, far from it.


How does that impact on what I said???

The NSA is collecting data that may be useful in leading to people communicating with people known to be terrorists...or terrorist sympathizers.

They may also be targeting certain people and organizations for reasons we are not privy to.

Get over yourself.
Olivier5
 
  3  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2014 06:49 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Let's agree that you have lost control, Olivier. Probably a result of all the digging you've been doing.

Let's agree that you THINK you're smart... and that your reasons to believe so remain conveniently obscure.

Quote:
Ahhh...another example of someone who questions the veracity of damn near everything coming from our government...but agreeing to the truth furnished in an instance which seems to bolster a position you are taking.

Very hypocritical.

And of course you are doing something different? Like you believe ALL governmental sources?

The difference for me is in the credibility of the source. The White House panel was independent, thus more trustworthy than the NSA and co, who have good self-serving reasons to harp on their own usefulness.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 05:55 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Let's agree that you have lost control, Olivier. Probably a result of all the digging you've been doing.

Let's agree that you THINK you're smart... and that your reasons to believe so remain conveniently obscure.


Let's agree that either you do not know how to read...or that mischaracterizing what people say to you has become an addiction.

I did not say I was smart, Olivier...I said I was not stupid.


Quote:
Quote:
Ahhh...another example of someone who questions the veracity of damn near everything coming from our government...but agreeing to the truth furnished in an instance which seems to bolster a position your are taking.

Very hypocritical.

And of course you are doing something different? Like you believe ALL governmental sources?


No, I do not...and have said so. Several times, in fact.

But you, on the other hand, seem to doubt everything coming from the American government...and then cite something that seems to fit your perspective of things.

It is very hypocritical on your part...although the fact that you cannot see it as being so is kinda comical.



https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTLwVShm_aM6H47xddcuJysb6NKEPLo7dT-1_lwHuA8EcCOMTd1



Quote:
The difference for me is in the credibility of the source. The White House panel was independent, thus more trustworthy than the NSA and co, who have good self-serving reasons to harp on their own usefulness.



Nice rationalization. I like it.


http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/crying-with-laughter.gif
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 09:16 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
They may also be targeting certain people and organizations for reasons we are not privy to.
Such and similar always reminds me to certain episodes from the times I've been at the navy (conscripted (1970)and later (1971-1982) as a reserve officer in the 'alarm unit').

We were on "spy duty" in the Baltic Sea = going up and down a stretch of six nautical miles and observing the "Eastern Bloc" vessels. My job was to photograph them .
Additionally, I had to "catalogue" the vessels: course, condition, antennas, estimated crew etc. . After ciphering (got security checked up to "secret" for this purpose!)that, I marked on a kind of perforated paper tape and gave it to the radio operators.
From that moment onwards, it was a Nato-secret ("top secret").

I thought this to be rather stupid, since I had produced all of this "top secret", but couldn't proof-read my own work ... because additionally suddenly my own handwriting was "top secret" as well, and I wasn't allowed to look at any more.

So I wrote a letter (as telex, "secret" via our radio operators) to our commanding admiral, copy to the responsible commanding officer of the military intelligence (I've always been a very low-key and reticent person Wink ) ... and became 'upgraded' in my security within days.

Actually, anyone in a rubber boat with a (good) camera and good (expensive) lenses, some nautical knowledge plus a recent book (Weyers Flottentaschenbuch) from the local bookshop could have done my job.
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 12:34 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Interesting job. What do you do now, if it is not impolite to ask?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 12:43 pm
@revelette2,
Quote:
Sometimes I get lazy and don't want to go to the trouble of looking it up to get precise, so I would rather leave myself wiggle room.

It's not laziness, I suspect. Rather it looks like the fear of discovering something you really don't want to know.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 12:46 pm
@Frank Apisa,
It's not a rationalization, it's RATIONAL to believe an independent panel more than the particular office being reviewed. Why do you think Obama asked for an independent panel in the first place? He could have believed the NSA's version of events, but he knew better than that...
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 01:03 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

It's not a rationalization, it's RATIONAL to believe an independent panel more than the particular office being reviewed. Why do you think Obama asked for an independent panel in the first place? He could have believed the NSA's version of events, but he knew better than that...


Interesting defense of your original rationalization.

Glad you are still intent on digging. My golf game is in the toilet...and you are providing me with the entertainment I need until I get it back on track.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 01:16 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Since you can't answer it, you will pretend to laugh at my argument. But you and I know that you can't answer it... :-)
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 01:37 pm
@revelette2,
• I've had had many talks with someone (a friend of my late mother-in-law), who had been on a GDR-boat, which did the same job as we did ... and which we had to approach a couple of times very close (in international waters) to read the id-number (they stayed mainly at anchor, changed the boats at night and during bad weather).

• We were missed by a few yards by a surfacing Danish submarine - they did the same job we did, neither knew of each other. (That not gave some "water disturbances").

• When we were on duty as a "picket boat" (four boats, minesweepers, were doing this job over roughly six weeks: one "on vacancy", one on duty, one "picket boat", one on the way back from or to duty), we got a "special job": taking a "passenger" on (sic!) the three-mile-border of the GDR. That stretched our picket duty from 24 hours to four days ... since we had a) to wait for a dark, rainy night, b) get the order to go there from a "higher command".
Since I was doing the navigation, I was calculating all and everything. I was 100% sure that we clear of the three miles zone, when the outlook noticed "something black, obviously sinking, waving". Inside the three mile zone. So, I made a fatal navigational error, we got our passenger aboard, no-one seemed to have noticed us (it took them nearly one until the 'shadowed' us).
I noticed in the log, with a position outside the 3-mile-zone: passenger, unknown name, aboard at position so-and-so.
This person was immediately covered with a blanket, stayed only in the captain's cabin, spoke English with accent, left our boat a couple of hours later, on sea, going on board of a yacht with no flag or identity number/name.
What I noted in the log as well. (I had had a discussion with the captain, why I did it. He followed my argumentation.)
Two days later, we got visitors just minutes after having arrived in the harbour. One spoke German, identified himself as someone from the German military intelligence; the other spoke German with accent, didn't show his ID-card nor tell his name. They convinced me that unfortunately I had spilled some ink over that page of the log.

• We all were highly praised by our squadron commander and the admiral of the mine fleet (which we didn't like a lot, because we had to wear parade uniform - but got two extra days free, which was good). And got weeks later a new similar job in the North Sea and North Atlantic. (Actually, it was only planned for four days. But a Dutch frigate had had engine trouble - so we had to start earlier. And an English destroyer had had something else - so it lasted longer.)
But this job really was fun_ following a Russian "trawler" from the Kiel canal to the English Channel, then up the English east coast to ... well nearly where icebergs commonly can be seen [I didn't have any good charts for that region at all!]
That "trawler" had an ocean of antennas, instead of 67 crew members as officially noted, there were more than 150 -I'd counted 150+ every morning, when they made their morning gymnastics on deck. When they did so, we circled around them and played the "International" on our loudspeaker system.

... ... ... ...



Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 01:52 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Since you can't answer it, you will pretend to laugh at my argument. But you and I know that you can't answer it... :-)


Answer it???

Was there a question somewhere from you???

You are a rationalizer, Olivier...and someone who cannot acknowledge when he has gone over the edge.

A digger of deep holes.

A perfect foil.

If you weren't here...I would try to invent you.

Wink
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 02:02 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Your fascination with "holes" says a lot about you, Frank.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 02:13 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Your fascination with "holes" says a lot about you, Frank.



Actually, I am not fascinated by holes, Olivier.

I am amused by people like you who regularly dig holes...and then continue to dig when surely they must realize the futility and counterproductivity of it.

It is, in metaphor form, the equivalent of a prize fighter who leads with his chin.

Bad habit.

You ought to break yourself of it...but the fact that you almost certainly will not even make an attempt in that direction...

...is one of the most amusing aspects of this entire enterprise.


https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRx4kpCsST0qKn6Mz7PoPP3El-_Ls46PS3uzHvHGr3rcrU3BLQqrw
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 02:22 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Whatever...
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Sep, 2014 02:46 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Whatever...



Ya gotta know when to hold 'em...know when to fold 'em!

Wink
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 558
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/15/2024 at 09:57:37