If you have not seen it, please watch the Conspiracy Of Silence documentary.
Also - if you are unaware, you should look into Johnny Gosh/Jeff Gannon and how he relates to the Bush/Republican party with respect to the information revealed in the Conspiracy of Silence.
Please cite ANYTHING other than that wikipedia. Seriously; I am not saying you are wrong - but I am aware of no credible refutation of this matter - and actually, through my own, personal experience as well as the information I have seen for nearly 2 decades, I cannot dismiss this.
Please provide more info.
When I am in a place of "typing" I can expound on both my experience as well as that which I have seen in this matter
I would appreciate whatever info you could -- I am personally aware of massive child abuse situations that happened here in California.
I suspect you only believe this to be a hoax only because you cant fathom the people involved. An written article does not refute reality - so you're on (my) hook to defend your claims.
Right. Some things would be explained from the basics, and some topics would be covered by referring you to obscure papers on advanced techniques in machine learning published by the professors.
The issue I see with their ability to execute on those ideas though - I think facebook home's epic flop is a good indication of the quality of innovation to expect from FB going forward.
The issue with Home was that it was just too early to launch. They thought they could launch a beta product and get some feedback before iterating, but they severely underestimated users' needs for things like folders; which seems obvious in retrospect.
I think it will turn out to be a successful product as it evolves and integrates with more services.
All of those but possibly Boston are essentially mentally ill people who went nuts - domestic attacks. The NSA is usually tasked with dealing with foreign threats. So your complaint is, by and large, mistaken. Your complaint is better directed at local police and mental health facilities.
It's almost certain that the TLAs generally tries to keep within the law as they see it, and push the boundaries as far as they can - this is the trend of the executive branch. I would expect them to have batteries of lawyers hired to find out exactly what is permissible, and then to do all of it.
It'a also entirely disingenuous to say that the TLAs have no purpose. To riff off of @leashless from Twitter - they are a reaction - an immune response - to some entities which do and did some very bad things covertly, and are now being an autoimmune disease on the host state. The truth is, 9/11 gave a rather large blank check to the industrial/ security/intelligence companies and agencies in the US, and most people were not in the mood to worry about civil liberties too much at the time. "Never again" was the refrain, and that sort of perspective removes all ability to do a cost-benefit analysis. So they expanded with that attitude and that check... then, like beauracracies do, they entrenched and began to expand power and capabilities. This is not new behavior in any bureaucracy. This sort of eventuality was, as I recall, predicted quite loudly after the Patriot Act was passed.
If HHS Feinstein bill passes, then it should be assumed to make all surveillance legal, thus any following of her personal actions: location, where-abouts, transactions, conversations etc are fair game. We should post cameras outside her Presidio Terrace San Francisco home watching every ingress/egress action by anyone visiting the place.
I am at the openstack conference right now. My colleague was talking in hebrew to a lot of folks the past few days. I said to him jokingly "Where did all these Israeli's come from that are here"
His reply: "Dude, all this shit comes out of Israel! its the whole tech/NSA bullshit used against the palestinians!"
It was a casual comment - but very interesting in that its a foregone conclusion that the surveillance state is just a function of the culture of Israeli tech development.
As much as the UK government would probably love being confused for the US government, at least the visit to the Guardian and detainment of Miranda were both done by the UK.
And given how the UK government loves nothing more than to be the lapdog of the US, I have no doubts it was done entirely voluntarily.
Eagerly even, as an opportunity to show off just how extra exceedingly loyal minions they are.
Frankly, I have little doubt that the UK government participates so eagerly that just occasionally some of their US counterparts must be a little bit embarrassed on their behalf over seeing their total lack of self respect in trying to impress.
When I last checked, in the US, it's actually not illegal for someone without a clearance to possess classified material. This is why newspapers can print unredacted classified documents and not immediately go to jail.
It is, however illegal for someone with a clearance to mishandle classified material. "Mishandling" includes "Permitting access to classified material to non-cleared personnel.". If you mishandle classified material you may be reprimanded, have your clearance revoked, be fined, or go to jail for a very long time.
It's also illegal to traffic it across international borders, which is why what foreign spies do is prosecutable. Which is the exact thing they were doing.
Good point, but the Greenwald-Snowden case is a little different. We all know the identities of the informants. The issue with the harassment of Miranda has nothing to do with espionage, it's just heavy handed.
In the case of the Chinese hackers, they were spying on reporters to discover their sources.
What they appeared to be looking for were the names of people who might have provided information to Mr. Barboza.
AFAIK we don't have evidence of similar US spying for the purpose of blackmail, harassment, etc. because my concern is whether the NSA might use its sources for those ends.
The destruction of the Guardian's laptops was about ensuring they didn't get stolen by someone else - if you read the story at the time, the spooks actually wanted the Guardian to hand the laptops over but Guardian refused and destruction was a mutually agreed way out.
Miranda's detainment, confiscation of the memory sticks etc was to be expected - as far as the UK Government is concerned he's carry stolen state secrets.
What I don't really understand is why he flew through London carrying them, I believe Madrid has more routes to South American - I wonder if he was routed so he would be picked up for massive publicity.
Also - if you are unaware, you should look into Johnny Gosh/Jeff Gannon and how he relates to the Bush/Republican party with respect to the information revealed in the Conspiracy of Silence.