• Home
  •  » High Street
  •  » The Bush-Obama-Trump Whitehouse - Your privacy down the shitter

#1 2013-06-06 11:43:08

A balanced look at the erosion of our privacy and civil rights.  I've said it before, our rights are nothing more than a nuisance and a hindrance to our supposed servants who would be our masters.

Last edited by XregnaR (2016-11-13 16:55:57)

Offline

 

#3 2013-06-06 12:20:04

Dmtdust wrote:

The crap is just getting higher.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju … :Position1

Back when Homeland Security first proposed this program I supported the limited use for tracking phone calls from outside the U.S. from known terrorists to Americans.  Now, it seems as though the program has morphed into the gathering of all information so it can be sorted and sifted for any possible terrorist links or who knows what.  Coincidentally, Orwell's 1984 was published 64 years ago today.  "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

Offline

 

#4 2013-06-06 14:49:36

http://high-street.org/uploads/thumbs/415_cdn-media_nationaljournal_com.jpg

The beady eyes, flared nose and pursed lips. Oh shit! W. pulled the ol' "Shoe Polish Switch-A-Roo" on us. No wonder he always had wood for Condoleezza Rice.

Last edited by Banjo (2013-06-06 14:50:55)

Offline

 

#5 2013-06-06 14:59:56

Is anyone even remotely surprised by this?

I have assumed, since well before 9/11, that any non face-to-face communication was potentially being monitored. 

And judging by the behavior of western civilization (a la Facebook, Twitter, Instagram), privacy hasn't been a concern for some time.

Offline

 

#6 2013-06-06 18:52:36

phreddy wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

The crap is just getting higher.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju … :Position1

Back when Homeland Security first proposed this program I supported the limited use for tracking phone calls from outside the U.S. from known terrorists to Americans.  Now, it seems as though the program has morphed into the gathering of all information so it can be sorted and sifted for any possible terrorist links or who knows what.  Coincidentally, Orwell's 1984 was published 64 years ago today.  "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

So, you were before it before you were against it? Does your memory also extend as far as the code name of the operation Dick Cheney put it place to guarantee a 100% take of phone and email traffic in the States?

Offline

 

#7 2013-06-07 11:00:57

Tall Paul wrote:

So, you were before it before you were against it? Does your memory also extend as far as the code name of the operation Dick Cheney put it place to guarantee a 100% take of phone and email traffic in the States?

Can you liberals finally just get past Bush & Cheney and start thinking about how we protect ourselves from government overreach?  Does saying Bush did it too make it OK with you?  If not, shut up about it and stand up for your rights. 

Yes, Bush had a data collection system.  It was set up only to monitor traffic between terrorists inside and outside the U.S.  But like every instance where we allow the camel's nose under the tent, the beast eventually lords over our household.  Today we discover it wasn't just Verizon cell phones.  They are monitoring EVERYTHING!  They say they are only looking for foreign targets.  And if you believe that..........

The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post.

And then there's Prism.

Last edited by phreddy (2013-06-07 11:03:36)

Offline

 

#8 2013-06-07 11:42:47

Back when Homeland Security

I'm actually intensely offended and alarmed that we even have a "Department of Homeland Security" everything about that reeks of bad ideas and government intrusion.


And people want to get rid of EPA, Education and OSHA to shrink government yet keep this thing??

Offline

 

#9 2013-06-07 12:14:04

Emmeran wrote:

Back when Homeland Security

I'm actually intensely offended and alarmed that we even have a "Department of Homeland Security" everything about that reeks of bad ideas and government intrusion.


And people want to get rid of EPA, Education and OSHA to shrink government yet keep this thing??

More people are led by fear than not.  Weird, but there ya go.

Offline

 

#10 2013-06-07 14:19:55

Emmeran wrote:

Back when Homeland Security

I'm actually intensely offended and alarmed that we even have a "Department of Homeland Security" everything about that reeks of bad ideas and government intrusion.


And people want to get rid of EPA, Education and OSHA to shrink government yet keep this thing??

Yeah, gotta agree.  That's what we get for the FBI, CIA, DOD, and NSA refusing to share data and cooperate with each other.  DHS was "supposed" to be a clearing-house whereby all Federal agencies exchanged data under a single umbrella.  What we ended up with is the largest Black Ops Agency in the world.  Apparently, with little regard for The Constitution.

And, it's the third-largest Cabinet Department behind Defense and Veteran's Affairs, employing more than 200,000 people.  Most of whom's main qualification is that they can pass a Civil Service exam.

Offline

 

#11 2013-06-07 15:22:51

phreddy wrote:

Can you liberals finally just get past Bush & Cheney and start thinking about how we protect ourselves from government overreach?  Does saying Bush did it too make it OK with you?  If not, shut up about it and stand up for your rights. 

Yes, Bush had a data collection system.  It was set up only to monitor traffic between terrorists inside and outside the U.S. ...

I was with you Phred on us all gathering round the campfire to roast marshmallows until you went and spoiled any fraternal urging with such tripe as that naked Bush apology. What have you damaged yourself with so many years filling your noggin' with wingnut rantings you just can not let it go even when you want to?

Feel free to delude yourself, but the various internal spying programs we are seeing exposed today were developed under the Bush administration, and continued under Obama. They were from the beginning intenet on gathering up Americans internal communications of all types. Yesterday Feinstein suggested that this same Fisa order has been continuously renewed since Bush put it in place.

“As far as I know, this is the exact three-month renewal of what has been in place for the past seven years,” Feinstein said. “This renewal is carried out by the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] under the business records section of the Patriot Act. Therefore it is lawful. It has been briefed to Congress.”

Now for the dodge

“Every member of the United States Senate has been advised of this,” said Chambliss in a press conference. “To my knowledge there has not been any citizen who has registered a complaint. It has proved meritorious because we have collected significant information on bad guys, but only on bad guys, over the years.”

Offline

 

#12 2013-06-07 15:31:32

Congress is outraged over this. Of course it is the realization that their own communications have been spied upon. Lets take bets if that outrage results in changes to protect them or for the likes of you and me.

Senators Grill Attorney General Holder On Whether Verizon Surveillance Targeted Them, Too

Offline

 

#13 2013-06-07 16:05:36

The next link should love you long time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/busin … ss&emc=rss

Offline

 

#14 2013-06-07 16:30:52

Glenn Greenwald wrote:

The N.S.A. is kind of the crown jewel in government secrecy.

An apt description, crown jewel.  Something shiny and sparkly to distract you from other things. If the NSA is doing something that worries people, then DSA is probably doing something that will make them shit themselves in terror.....

Offline

 

#15 2013-06-07 17:00:22

XregnaR wrote:

If the NSA is doing something that worries people, then DSA is probably doing something that will make them shit themselves in terror.....

Details, please.

Offline

 

#16 2013-06-07 17:07:01

Offline

 

#17 2013-06-07 18:15:09

choad wrote:

XregnaR wrote:

If the NSA is doing something that worries people, then DSA is probably doing something that will make them shit themselves in terror.....

Details, please.

If I told you, then I'd have to kill myself.  then you.  Then a puppy.  Then myself again.

Offline

 

#18 2013-06-07 18:50:05

phreddy wrote:

Can you liberals finally just get past Bush & Cheney and start thinking about how we protect ourselves from government overreach?  Does saying Bush did it too make it OK with you?  If not, shut up about it and stand up for your rights.

Sorry Phreddy, no can do. The best way to stand up for my rights is to demand that the miscreants who started this illegal and immoral criminal enterprise are identified, tried and punished in such a way that no politic hack would ever try that again. Would you have a different standard for them than for bank robbers? Granted, people still rob banks no matter how many are locked away but that's no reason to stop investigating such crimes. And what do you think would have happened had Obama tried to stop such data collection? Fox news had banner headlines calling him a terrorist just for bumping fists with his wife, for God's sake. Their barely-veiled calls for armed revolt would have come right out into the open mighty fast. The problem is on your side of the aisle, not on mine, no matter how much denial you take refuge in. You can say what you like about Jimmy Carter, but he's not afraid to travel to Europe for fear of arrest. 

phreddy wrote:

Yes, Bush had a data collection system.  It was set up only to monitor traffic between terrorists inside and outside the U.S.  But like every instance where we allow the camel's nose under the tent, the beast eventually lords over our household.  Today we discover it wasn't just Verizon cell phones.  They are monitoring EVERYTHING!  They say they are only looking for foreign targets.  And if you believe that..........

Correction: YOU just found out about it, the rest of us have known for years. We just didn't have the evidence to prove it.

Offline

 

#19 2013-06-08 07:05:00

The upside, at least no one with two brain cells to rub together will ever trust these evil venal cunts again.

NYTimes wrote:

The companies that negotiated with the government include Google, which owns YouTube; Microsoft, which owns Hotmail and Skype; Yahoo; Facebook; AOL; Apple; and Paltalk, according to one of the people briefed on the discussions...

In at least two cases, at Google and Facebook, one of the plans discussed was to build separate, secure portals, like a digital version of the secure physical rooms that have long existed for classified information, in some instances on company servers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/techn … ss&emc=rss

TheVerge wrote:

Google's Larry Page denies PRISM involvement, says secrecy 'undermines the freedoms we all cherish'

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/7/440732 … nvolvement

Gawker wrote:

Zuckerberg Releases Statement Calling PRISM Charges "Outrageous"

http://gawker.com/zuckerberg-releases-s … -512038573

Offline

 

#20 2013-06-08 07:17:09

http://high-street.org/img/1973-07-30_Newsweek_Nixon_Tapes.jpg

Offline

 

#22 2013-06-09 18:45:21

Welcome to life in the New Soviet Empire, where your thoughts are the business of The State!  Our long planned High Street/Cruel Reunion will be held in a prison camp!

Last edited by fnord (2013-06-09 19:11:11)

Offline

 

#23 2013-06-09 18:51:40

Woah, that is the most remarkable stand for someone to take. A clear concise argument for reigning in policies that stand no democratic review and are only held back from turning against our own people at the whim of whomever are our future authorities.

Once he reached the conclusion that the NSA's surveillance net would soon be irrevocable, he said it was just a matter of time before he chose to act. "What they're doing" poses "an existential threat to democracy", he said.
...

For him, it is a matter of principle. "The government has granted itself power it is not entitled to. There is no public oversight. The result is people like myself have the latitude to go further than they are allowed to," he said.

Offline

 

#25 2013-06-10 01:10:13

A commenter says: I don't even know how to express my feelings at this. An American citizen, who has exposed illegal government activity that violates both the letter and spirit of the Constitution, has to hide out in Hong Kong and hope for foreign asylum.

This is not the country I grew up in.

I wonder what Em's take on this will be? Given that Snowden claims to have carefully sorted through what he would release to avoid harming people but outing the most essential methods of our war efforts. Does that make him different than Manning? Does such document dumps become justified by applying such consideration. What about this would make Snowden a hero vs Manning a traitor?

Snowden: "I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest," he said. "There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn't turn over, because harming people isn't my goal. Transparency is."

Offline

 

#26 2013-06-10 10:14:37

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/9/1370794034126/NSA-Kids-books-001.jpg
~Clicky~

Extra credit.

"Horton Hears Every Goddamn Thing You Say"

Last edited by whosasailorthen (2013-06-10 10:18:13)

Offline

 

#27 2013-06-10 11:10:47

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/dwarf_fortress.png

Offline

 

#28 2013-06-10 13:26:24

Johnny_Rotten wrote:

I wonder what Em's take on this will be? Given that Snowden claims to have carefully sorted through what he would release to avoid harming people but outing the most essential methods of our war efforts. Does that make him different than Manning? Does such document dumps become justified by applying such consideration. What about this would make Snowden a hero vs Manning a traitor?

Em thinks the jury is still out on this one.  Again, unlike Ellsberg, he does not seem to be a stable individual however at the same time this program was pre-assumed by most of us and is rehensible in concept.

Offline

 

#29 2013-06-10 15:54:58

If so many of you believe the whole world knew all along that our government was listening in on every email, phone, cell, and social media communication, then it wasn't much of a secret.  I suspect the terrorist networks are at least as informed as our High-Street heads.  Therefore, what has Snowden done except out a poorly kept secret?  Manning, on the other hand, turned over tactical and strategic information which had life and death consequences to our troops and our informants.  Notwithstanding the expressed consequences for a soldier who turns over military secrets.

Offline

 

#30 2013-06-10 17:17:53

phreddy wrote:

Manning, on the other hand, turned over tactical and strategic information which had life and death consequences to our troops and our informants.

Name one.

Offline

 

#31 2013-06-10 18:23:28

Tall Paul wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Manning, on the other hand, turned over tactical and strategic information which had life and death consequences to our troops and our informants.

Name one.

Here is a list.  The prosecution has already stated they will present the details of actual damages he caused at the penalty phase of his trial.

Were he not a young gay kid, his support would be minimal.

Offline

 

#32 2013-06-10 18:36:04

phreddy's list wrote:

Did I read your statement correctly? Did you actually say that the prosecution of Bradley Manning is justified because evidence of guilt will only be presented after his conviction? Way to promote truth, justice and The American Way, Superman!

Last edited by Tall Paul (2013-06-10 18:47:00)

Offline

 

#33 2013-06-10 18:49:19

Emmeran wrote:

Again, unlike Ellsberg, he does not seem to be a stable individual

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ell … g_break-in

Guess we'll never know.

Offline

 

#34 2013-06-10 19:04:17

Tall Paul wrote:

Did I read your statement correctly? Did you actually say that the prosecution of Bradley Manning is justified because evidence of guilt will only be presented after his conviction? Way to promote truth, justice and The American Way, Superman!

No Paul, you did not read my statement correctly, which is not unusual.  I said evidence of the damage his crimes have caused will be presented at the penalty phase of his trial.  You probably don't know that proving damage caused by his actions is not needed to convict him of aiding the enemy.  However, after he is convicted, the judge takes those damages into account when deciding his fate.  This is why you always see the family of the victims testifying during this phase.  I hope this was helpful and enlightening for you.

Offline

 

#35 2013-06-10 20:29:41

phreddy wrote:

Tall Paul wrote:

Did I read your statement correctly? Did you actually say that the prosecution of Bradley Manning is justified because evidence of guilt will only be presented after his conviction? Way to promote truth, justice and The American Way, Superman!

No Paul, you did not read my statement correctly, which is not unusual.  I said evidence of the damage his crimes have caused will be presented at the penalty phase of his trial.  You probably don't know that proving damage caused by his actions is not needed to convict him of aiding the enemy.  However, after he is convicted, the judge takes those damages into account when deciding his fate.  This is why you always see the family of the victims testifying during this phase.  I hope this was helpful and enlightening for you.

You're right, I didn't know that proof of guilt was not required to prove guilt, Comrade.

Last edited by Tall Paul (2013-06-10 20:30:04)

Offline

 

#37 2013-06-10 21:00:50

Stands to reason, all those immigrants and all, plus the old red connections.

Offline

 

#38 2013-06-11 03:10:41

With PRISM leaker Ed Snowden now presumed missing, here's the ballerina he left behind. Click image.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/10/article-0-1A3FA56E000005DC-15_634x632.jpg

Last edited by choad (2013-06-11 03:12:33)

Offline

 

#39 2013-06-11 05:36:22

While I do think this is the most important (and expected) exposure in the last hundred years and she does appear to be smoking hot I also must remind everyone that one man's junk is another man's treasure.

Offline

 

#40 2013-06-11 11:40:28

omaha.com wrote:

The U.S. Congress may look into the NSA leaks. That's good news. We should have some answers by March of 2039.

To get some privacy, President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping went for a walk alone in the California desert. Fortunately, the NSA had placed a microphone inside a salamander, so part of their conversation was recorded.

The federal government barely knows anything about China's activities these days. It's too busy monitoring the Verizon records of a fry cook in Moline.

***Linked for attribution only***

!!!!What have I done wrong here - this type of linking normally works!!!!

edit: linking stalls at line breaks

Last edited by choad (2013-06-11 12:05:25)

Offline

 

#41 2013-06-11 12:19:44

Thanks To Fnord For This:

Last edited by Dmtdust (2013-06-11 12:21:05)

Offline

 

#42 2013-06-11 12:33:09

Dmtdust wrote:

Thanks To Fnord For This:

For Democrats, it's all a matter of politics.  It's OK to trample your civil rights so long as a Democrat doing the trampling. 

Democrats now view the NSA’s phone surveillance as acceptable by 64% to 34%. In January 2006, by a similar margin (61% to 36%), Democrats said it was unacceptable for the NSA to scrutinize phone calls and emails of suspected terrorists.

And don't tell me the Republicans have flipped too, because back in 2006 we were told monitoring was only of known terrorists.  This was and is fine with Republicans today.  Dems, on the other hand, were dead set against it back then, but now monitoring every American is just fine.  Hypocrites!!!

Offline

 

#43 2013-06-11 12:47:13

Good for you phreddy. You found another reason to make yourself feel superior. But the fact is, and was, that ALL phone calls and emails were being monitored for key words or phrases. I clearly recall seeing lists of terms which would flag your calls for review.

So keep telling yourself the lies and believing them. (sarcasm) It will make you a better person in the end. (/sarcasm)

Offline

 

#44 2013-06-11 13:06:40

Essential reading: The NSA's infrastructure for monitoring every communication in the USA

The former NSA official held his thumb and forefinger close together: “We are that far from a turnkey totalitarian state.”

Last edited by lechero (2013-06-11 13:08:31)

Offline

 

#45 2013-06-11 13:56:27

phreddy wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

Thanks To Fnord For This:

For Democrats, it's all a matter of politics.  It's OK to trample your civil rights so long as a Democrat doing the trampling. 

Democrats now view the NSA’s phone surveillance as acceptable by 64% to 34%. In January 2006, by a similar margin (61% to 36%), Democrats said it was unacceptable for the NSA to scrutinize phone calls and emails of suspected terrorists.

And don't tell me the Republicans have flipped too, because back in 2006 we were told monitoring was only of known terrorists.  This was and is fine with Republicans today.  Dems, on the other hand, were dead set against it back then, but now monitoring every American is just fine.  Hypocrites!!!

Er.... no.

Offline

 

#46 2013-06-11 14:18:05

Keep playing that dems vs. repubs card Phreddy.  It's worked great so far, and has been 100% accurate....

Offline

 

#47 2013-06-11 14:45:56

I thought we were done with that version of the game.

Offline

 

#48 2013-06-11 16:35:54

XregnaR wrote:

Keep playing that dems vs. repubs card Phreddy.  It's worked great so far, and has been 100% accurate....

I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush.  I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop.  And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

Offline

 

#49 2013-06-11 16:52:53

phreddy wrote:

XregnaR wrote:

Keep playing that dems vs. repubs card Phreddy.  It's worked great so far, and has been 100% accurate....

I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush.  I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop.  And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

G. Washington started this little game here in America - good luck at ending it.

Offline

 

#50 2013-06-11 20:27:11

phreddy wrote:

XregnaR wrote:

Keep playing that dems vs. repubs card Phreddy.  It's worked great so far, and has been 100% accurate....

I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush.  I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop.  And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

I give a shit that the man ignored all of the ample warnings about Bin Laden's plans, and then used a ruse to invade Iraq to pay back some supposed slight that Bush Sr. had from Saddam.  Several thousand dead American & British forces died for that asswipes lies, plus countless Iraqi's, the majority of them civilians for that little perves transgressions.  Stand Trial?  I want to see him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

That man started the fucking run away train of the NSA shitting down our collective throats, and you think that was a nasty little swipe?  I was being generous to that fucking war criminal.

Offline

 

#51 2013-06-12 00:40:38

http://high-street.org/sidepic/trollthensa.png
http://trollthensa.com/

Last edited by choad (2013-06-12 08:43:08)

Offline

 

#52 2013-06-12 01:02:46

choad wrote:

http://trollthensa.com/

Some variants at least so they don't filter them all out!

Offline

 

#53 2013-06-12 06:08:21

Dmtdust wrote:

Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

Can we arrange for her to swing naked, cuz...  ...well wait I'll be in my bunk if you need me...

Offline

 

#54 2013-06-12 06:53:26

Emmeran wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

Can we arrange for her to swing naked, cuz...  ...well wait I'll be in my bunk if you need me...

Dat be raaayciiist!  You be playin wit yo dik thinken bout a black woman be'in lynched!

Offline

 

#55 2013-06-12 10:04:59

Dmtdust wrote:

phreddy wrote:

XregnaR wrote:

Keep playing that dems vs. repubs card Phreddy.  It's worked great so far, and has been 100% accurate....

I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush.  I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop.  And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

I give a shit that the man ignored all of the ample warnings about Bin Laden's plans, and then used a ruse to invade Iraq to pay back some supposed slight that Bush Sr. had from Saddam.  Several thousand dead American & British forces died for that asswipes lies, plus countless Iraqi's, the majority of them civilians for that little perves transgressions.  Stand Trial?  I want to see him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

That man started the fucking run away train of the NSA shitting down our collective throats, and you think that was a nasty little swipe?  I was being generous to that fucking war criminal.

Sorry, the public's short-term memory is already starting to alter history.

Offline

 

#56 2013-06-12 11:38:09

Baywolfe wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

phreddy wrote:


I hope you noticed that I was simply responding to Dusty's nasty little snipe at Bush.  I really don't give a shit who started all this invasion of privacy, I just want it to stop.  And, doing so will require the majority of Dems to revert to their previous position of believing it is a violation of civil rights.

I give a shit that the man ignored all of the ample warnings about Bin Laden's plans, and then used a ruse to invade Iraq to pay back some supposed slight that Bush Sr. had from Saddam.  Several thousand dead American & British forces died for that asswipes lies, plus countless Iraqi's, the majority of them civilians for that little perves transgressions.  Stand Trial?  I want to see him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair & Condie swing from a gibbet for their war crimes.

That man started the fucking run away train of the NSA shitting down our collective throats, and you think that was a nasty little swipe?  I was being generous to that fucking war criminal.

Sorry, the public's short-term memory is already starting to alter history.

Which makes Bush's approval rating higher than Obama's.  Imagine that.

Offline

 

#57 2013-06-12 13:05:48

2 points difference to Obama from what I read.  Dyslexic?

anyway, this is an interesting take: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/11/n … ike-china/

Offline

 

#58 2013-06-12 13:32:28

Dmtdust wrote:

2 points difference to Obama from what I read.  Dyslexic?

anyway, this is an interesting take: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/11/n … ike-china/

This was an interesting take.  I see it also as a forewarning.  We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes.  It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions.  They certainly have the ability to do so.  The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Edit:  Oh yeah, add healthcare records to the above list.

Last edited by phreddy (2013-06-12 14:29:51)

Offline

 

#59 2013-06-12 15:37:42

phreddy wrote:

This was an interesting take.  I see it also as a forewarning.  We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes.  It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions.  They certainly have the ability to do so.  The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Edit:  Oh yeah, add healthcare records to the above list.

Which is why we can't allow them to politicize the situation, the divide and conquer approach has been working far to well for them over the past few decades.  The IRS scandal is a hilarious example - the complete irony of the concept of the IRS targeting anti-tax organizations being sold a political move is magnificent.

Offline

 

#60 2013-06-12 20:33:16

phreddy wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

2 points difference to Obama from what I read.  Dyslexic?

anyway, this is an interesting take: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/11/n … ike-china/

This was an interesting take.  I see it also as a forewarning.  We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes.  It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions.  They certainly have the ability to do so.  The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Edit:  Oh yeah, add healthcare records to the above list.

They've been monitoring banking transactions since 1970 for amounts over $10,000.

Offline

 

#61 2013-06-12 20:42:00

Baywolfe wrote:

phreddy wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

2 points difference to Obama from what I read.  Dyslexic?

anyway, this is an interesting take: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/11/n … ike-china/

This was an interesting take.  I see it also as a forewarning.  We already know the government has the ability to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and web posts, monitor our social media communications, intimidate journalists deemed unruly, and sick the IRS on us for political purposes.  It would not surprise me to learn they are monitoring all our financial and banking transactions.  They certainly have the ability to do so.  The only thing standing between us and centralized government control of our lives is an informed public who, for the most part, still find it unacceptable.

Edit:  Oh yeah, add healthcare records to the above list.

They've been monitoring banking transactions since 1970 for amounts over $10,000.

I thought it was cash transactions over $5k

Offline

 

#63 2013-06-12 22:57:36

conspiring to train terrorists in Oregon

I've actually been waiting a long time to ask this question:  "Who the fuck trains terrorists in Oregon?"

Offline

 

#64 2013-06-13 11:04:20

Here's a little tidbit which should open some eyes.  Homeland Security's dragnet surveillance excluded mosques, the breeding ground for homegrown terrorists.

Before mosques were excluded from the otherwise wide domestic spy net the administration has cast, the FBI launched dozens of successful sting operations against homegrown jihadists — inside mosques — and disrupted dozens of plots against the homeland.

Offline

 

#65 2013-06-13 11:20:40

Emmeran wrote:

conspiring to train terrorists in Oregon

I've actually been waiting a long time to ask this question:  "Who the fuck trains terrorists in Oregon?"

ELF?

Offline

 
  • Home
  •  » High Street
  •  » The Bush-Obama-Trump Whitehouse - Your privacy down the shitter

Board footer

high-street.org