Just Because We're Paranoid, Doesn't Mean they Aren't Watching Us!

[Christopher O'Brien]

[I've been warning friends and associates since the late '90s about ex-NSA head Bobby Inman's revelations concerning work on so-called "Total Information Awareness." Now we have info on "Steller-Wind" and I can say "I told you so!" Please watch the video. This Bush-league scenario reminds us that freedom is never free, because they are monitoring it, re-defining it and putting limits on it. I'm sure my digital dossier makes for some interesting but mostly boring reading...howzabout yours?---chris]

Article HERE:

As the anniversary of 9/11 approaches, instead of listening to mainstream media and government propaganda about what happened that day, and how all of the police state measures that have followed have made us more free, we should continue to uncover the lies of what really happened.

Now that the entire police state apparatus has obviously turned inward, as admitted in numerous government announcements and reports that are putting everyday Americans on terror watch lists, whistleblowers are stepping forward to reveal just how extensive and ongoing the surveillance has been. Instead of being heralded for their patriotism, these whistleblowers are being persecuted by the U.S. government. However, key insiders such as Sibel Edmonds, Susan Lindauer, and Thomas Drake have prevailed to reveal a startling amount of information that should concern any American who values civil liberties.

Former top NSA mathematician and code breaker, William Binney, has gone on record to publicly reveal the scope of a top-secret surveillance program that has directly targeted everyday Americans following 9/11. He is sounding an alarm about the massive scope of this project that engages in 24/7 warrantless wiretapping of the American population.

Rest of Article HERE:

 

[stonehart]

Very nice post Chris and I watched that video myself just a few weeks ago.

Been trying to warn people myself your years that this was all coming but I just kept being told I was a tin foil hat nutter..

Now it is plain as day that Big Brother is most definitely watching you.

Do I get to say I told you so? yeah I guess so but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

But it is never to late to resist..

 

[Randall]

Ya ... So no charges filed against Binney and several senators signed a petition of concern. Meanwhile there is some technology that they're using to find criminals ( particularly terrorists ) outside the USA, and now they're using it to find them inside the USA too ... geeze so far as I'm concerned it's about time ... or do you really think there might not be just a few people in the USA that it would be a good idea to keep an eye on? I posted this video up before too. It's produced by the "Christian Action Network" so it's probably biased, but let's find out if the facts in the video are true before dismissing it completely.

​

Where is the line between legitimate concern and a new McCarthyism?​

 

[exo_doc]

I already knew the Gov was doing this, just couldn't prove it.
I'm not a Bush/Chaney lover or basher, but they did their best to pave the way for this country to become a dictatorship.

 

[Randall]

I already knew the Gov was doing this, just couldn't prove it.
I'm not a Bush/Chaney lover or basher, but they did their best to pave the way for this country to become a dictatorship.

There are no doubt political problems and there always will be. But while you're worrying about the government enslaving citizens of the USA under some fascist dictatorship, corporations have already done most of that work under the guise of "free enterprise". Now the whole nation is divided up into corporate fiefdoms, large and small, each with their own land, security, enforcement, rules and regulations and if you don't like it, then too bad, you end up with no job, which means no pay, which means no food, shelter or clothing. So who do you turn to ... the "evil government"? They're the only ones powerful enough to tax those corporations and distribute any of the wealth back to individual citizens. So then what happens? Complaining about systems or laws that can be manipulated by either side isn't the solution. The only solution is for good people to find ways of working together and defending each other if necessary. Sure I know the next complaint ... "Whose to say who is good and who isn't?". We've already touched on that in another thread. There are ways and there good people to help us ( assuming we consider ourselves to be good people ) with that.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Many people do not know this fact: Countries such as the UK and USA have for a long time collected SIGINT (signals intelligence) on and for eachother.

This is a very clever way to get round some laws. Say agency X wishes to snoop on an American citizen but does not have enough for a warrant for a wiretap - they ask the UK to do it and pass the intel back to them. This completely bypasses any country's internal laws. It's a 2-way street and it's been going on for ages, certainly amongst the '5 I's' (5 English-speaking countries who share intel: US,UK,CAN,AUS,NZ)

 

[stonehart]

Many people do not know this fact: Countries such as the UK and USA have for a long time collected SIGINT (signals intelligence) on and for eachother.

This is a very clever way to get round some laws. Say agency X wishes to snoop on an American citizen but does not have enough for a warrant for a wiretap - they ask the UK to do it and pass the intel back to them. This completely bypasses any country's internal laws. It's a 2-way street and it's been going on for ages, certainly amongst the '5 I's' (5 English-speaking countries who share intel: US,UK,CAN,AUS,NZ)

Little know fact about NZ is that we have been a test bed of sorts for many things over the years.

The reason is that we are a small and isolated western nation.

In the late 1970's street cameras were set up in the three main cities ostensibly to monitor traffic flow (the official word) but in reality they were placed to monitor the open spaces such as Cathedral Square in Christchurch. By the late 1990s this camera web had spread out to the edge of the suburbs.
Now the systems are even in the suburbs.

All internet traffic here is monitored and much of it is collated at the Waihopai spy base in the north of the south Island. That base is joint run and is part of the US intelligence network.

Just interesting information.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I forget, what is the name of NZ's intel agency? There is the DSD (defense signals directorate) in Oz and it might be the GCSB?

Anyway, further to the post I made before, the 5 I's have the planet split up into areas of responsibility. UK being the Atlantic and Europe, NZ and Oz South East Asia. So places like Pine Gap, you can bet your bottom dollar, are ramping it up against China!
With it's population and government, I imagine the Chinese Intelligence is just enormous. Add to the officers all the agents on the book worldwide and PHEW, that's a lot of info. But info is not intel. Intel is something you try and create from Info.

 

[stonehart]

I forget, what is the name of NZ's intel agency? There is the DSD (defense signals directorate) in Oz and it might be the GCSB?

Anyway, further to the post I made before, the 5 I's have the planet split up into areas of responsibility. UK being the Atlantic and Europe, NZ and Oz South East Asia. So places like Pine Gap, you can bet your bottom dollar, are ramping it up against China!
With it's population and government, I imagine the Chinese Intelligence is just enormous. Add to the officers all the agents on the book worldwide and PHEW, that's a lot of info. But info is not intel. Intel is something you try and create from Info.

The NZ internal affairs department.

It deals with everything .. but as for the real intelligence gathering department here in NZ no one really knows.. Ostensibly it is the DOIA.

 

[mike]

The report to the European Parliament of 2001 states: "If UKUSA states operate listening stations in the relevant regions of the earth, in principle they can intercept all telephone, fax and data traffic transmitted via such satellites."[5]

ECHELON - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Been happening for a long time

ECHELON

 

[stonehart]

so how free are we really? that is the question.
I like my privacy and I fight to keep it, not because I have some dark agenda but because it is my birth right.. I am no ones slave.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Something to bear in mind is that even tho Echelon is scanning all comms, unless there are very good reasons to, no-one (human) is actually sitting there reading your texts and emails or listening to your calls. There just is not enough manpower to do so.
Expect only to be snooped on if you are involved in terrorism, drug importation or similarly serious crimes.

 

[stonehart]

Something to bear in mind is that even tho Echelon is scanning all comms, unless there are very good reasons to, no-one (human) is actually sitting there reading your texts and emails or listening to your calls. There just is not enough manpower to do so.
Expect only to be snooped on if you are involved in terrorism, drug importation or similarly serious crimes.

But what they are doing is recording it all .. that is a stupid amount of data they have sitting there... what is not a crime today could be a crime tomorrow.

What say you have a problem with how your Government is acting and wish to protest .. under new laws in some nation s and for sure the NDAA in the US that could be seen as a belligerent act or possible terrorism... that is the slippery slope we are on and we are sliding down it if we like it or not.

I guess to answer Ufology's point from early on, I do not have a problem with intelligence net works etc for the government as they are needed but the problem is just how it is used and how far it will go.

 

[mike]

Its a double edged sword to be sure.
I remember years ago being told by a senior Aust Telecom computer operator, they have a system that listened in on phone calls and if it heard certain words like heroin, or cocaine it would record the conversation and the two phone numbers involved.

While that came as a surprise at the time, in hindsight i see its only to be expected that law enforcement might use technology to counter drug dealers.

 

[Randall]

I guess to answer Ufology's point from early on, I do not have a problem with intelligence net works etc for the government as they are needed but the problem is just how it is used and how far it will go.

You've hit the nail on the head exactly. It's not the machines or the laws that are morally wrong in this case. If anything the laws are intended to uphold our moral values and the machines are there to assist us in that effort. The question is whether or not they will both be used in that manner and in a way that is defensible ( similar to the the other debate we've been having on religion ). We all have the right to be concerned about this. The potential as tools for good is as great as the potential to be abused. My point in this debate since the beginning is that, although imperfect, the laws and the technology are in the hands of comparitively good people who are not our enemies. Our enemies are completely different ...

A man walks inside the U.S. consulate Wednesday after it was attacked and set on fire by gunmen the day before.

 

[starise]

If big brother wants to spy on someone or locate them it is as simple as looking at Facebook in many cases.A law enforcement officer as much as told me this, that FB is the first thing they check.

I know the discussion is primarily on eavesdropping but if you carry a cell phone they can be on you in a heartbeat.

This is hearsay and taking the word of another, which may not be reliable. According to this source they have lists of people who are considered a threat. Some of these people are simply at political odds or have alternate viewpoints. You guys would probably be ok but I'm probably a gonner if and when they start rounding us up.
They might as well come and get me.I'm not running.

I think they are flagging far more than most believe if what I'm hearing is true.

Anyone who thinks they are truly free are living an illusion. You are only free until you do something they don't like.
It's coming and maybe sooner than you think.

They want you to think that they are collecting info to counter terrorism. In reality they are gearing up to come down on the citizens IMO.

 

[stonehart]

Its a double edged sword to be sure.
I remember years ago being told by a senior Aust Telecom computer operator, they have a system that listened in on phone calls and if it heard certain words like heroin, or cocaine it would record the conversation and the two phone numbers involved.

While that came as a surprise at the time, in hindsight i see its only to be expected that law enforcement might use technology to counter drug dealers.

You see I do not have a problem with that intrinsically, the problem I have is that it was covert and the public were not informed that it was going on.
The same system was/is in use here also.

You've hit the nail on the head exactly. It's not the machines or the laws that are morally wrong in this case. If anything the laws are intended to uphold our moral values and the machines are there to assist us in that effort. The question is whether or not they will both be used in that manner and in a way that is defensible ( similar to the the other debate we've been having on religion ). We all have the right to be concerned about this. The potential as tools for good is as great as the potential to be abused. My point in this debate since the beginning is that, although imperfect, the laws and the technology are in the hands of comparitively good people who are not our enemies. Our enemies are completely different ...

Oh I agree with you Ufology that in essence technology is neutral and that for the most part it is good people who are operating the systems.
The need for at least some level of internet policing is absolutely necessary (and that is coming from a former anon), I do not need to list the reasons why as they are obvious.
But the propensity for it to be abused is extremely high, and to be blunt I would not trust a politician as far as I could spit one for they always use things to their personal advantage and 9 times out of 10 they act and work as if it is one set of laws for us and very little if any for them.

A large percentage of the internet censorship/control laws (and this is where I have the biggest problem) are not coming from and focused on the obvious reason but are being pushed by the corporate agenda these days. PIPA, SOPA, ACTA etc (and there are others) in a nut shell were being pushed to protect and increase corporate profits at the expense of expression.

I believe that the threat of terrorism has also been used by the unscrupulous to push agenda's and curtail freedoms not only on the internet but in everyday life. I do not think many will argue that it has not been used this way. The NDAA scares the hell out of me because it is so general and vague in areas it should not be. Pray tell me people just what constitutes a belligerent act?

Now will it be used for draconian ends? possibly not but the possibility is there as are the same possibility's with with covert monitoring and corporate pushed internet laws.

I guess over all it is a catch 22 as yes policing is needed but just where do we draw the line.

 

[stonehart]

If big brother wants to spy on someone or locate them it is as simple as looking at Facebook in many cases.A law enforcement officer as much as told me this, that FB is the first thing they check.

I know the discussion is primarily on eavesdropping but if you carry a cell phone they can be on you in a heartbeat.

This is hearsay and taking the word of another, which may not be reliable. According to this source they have lists of people who are considered a threat. Some of these people are simply at political odds or have alternate viewpoints. You guys would probably be ok but I'm probably a gonner if and when they start rounding us up.
They might as well come and get me.I'm not running.

I think they are flagging far more than most believe if what I'm hearing is true.

Anyone who thinks they are truly free are living an illusion. You are only free until you do something they don't like.
It's coming and maybe sooner than you think.

They want you to think that they are collecting info to counter terrorism. In reality they are gearing up to come down on the citizens IMO.

Well put starise

For me it is the possible use to suppress conflicting political views that run contra to that of the ruling party's that makes me worry about this, for if that is the case then I am a goner myself

 

[Randall]

Oh I agree with you Ufology that in essence technology is neutral and that for the most part it is good people who are operating the systems. The need for at least some level of internet policing is absolutely necessary (and that is coming from a former anon), I do not need to list the reasons why as they are obvious. But the propensity for it to be abused is extremely high, and to be blunt I would not trust a politician as far as I could spit one for they always use things to their personal advantage and 9 times out of 10 they act and work as if it is one set of laws for us and very little if any for them.

A large percentage of the internet censorship/control laws (and this is where I have the biggest problem) are not coming from and focused on the obvious reason but are being pushed by the corporate agenda these days. PIPA, SOPA, ACTA etc (and there are others) in a nut shell were being pushed to protect and increase corporate profits at the expense of expression.

I believe that the threat of terrorism has also been used by the unscrupulous to push agenda's and curtail freedoms not only on the internet but in everyday life. I do not think many will argue that it has not been used this way. The NDAA scares the hell out of me because it is so general and vague in areas it should not be. Pray tell me people just what constitutes a belligerent act? Now will it be used for draconian ends? possibly not but the possibility is there as are the same possibility's with with covert monitoring and corporate pushed internet laws.

I guess over all it is a catch 22 as yes policing is needed but just where do we draw the line.

Where do we draw the line? That's certainly the real issue. It is just as bad to pre-convict the people who created the system as it is to pre-convict the people it's monitoring. So we draw the line the only place it can be drawn, and that is at the scene of the investigation. To replay a fictional example, the nuclear bomb is ticking down and millions of lives are on the line, but the scumbag is holding out on civil rights. Who do you root for? The scumbag or Jack ( Agent Jack Bauer - 24 )? The choice is obvious. The flip side is that in another scenario, some fly gets caught in the printer and "Tuttle" becomes "Buttle" ( Brazil ) and you know the rest of the story. Somewhere in the middle you have corruption and/or incompetence ranging from minor mistakes to abuse based on bias or personal gain. Opponents of crime prevention technology downplay the terrorist threat, but we know that it is real and the only thing stopping terrorists from carrying out an attack is their comparative lack of resources. Here's the latest ( as of the date of this posting ).

​

Since when did the "right to protest" include using rocket propelled grenades?​

Or the killing of embassy employees? Over a cartoon?​

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Because of 9/11 and the very obvious anti-Iranian posturing, I get worried over how sophisticated a possible next false flag might be? No-one is gonna repeat 9/11 but I can think of million ways to use the internet to stir things up. It's pretty damn scary really.