Well, I'm not, but this board is a home to them. In conjunction with the Snowden thread next door -- you know, the one misnamed Repealing The Patriot Act -- I have now counted a total of 5 (of course) posters on this board who have disclosed to me, in threads, PMs or on private channels, that they have special connections to US intelligence services, which is Why They Know Stuff. This tells us a number of important things: One, if Wordforge wanted, we could rule the world, or make a pretty good run at it. Two, if you want to keep the United States safe, consider this: These are of course extremely trustworthy, secretive people, all of them; they would have to be to enjoy such special confidence. And this obviously conforms exactly to the impeccable character we have seen from them and all WF posters over the decades. If questioned, they would deny; if caught, they would dissemble; if tortured, they would die before dishonour. However, the one thing under the Sun that yet tempts even these keepers of secrets to break trust, if ever so slightly, to hint at their secrets, and potentially to expose themselves and ultimately their contacts to the world, is the chance of berating or perhaps just impressing a semi-anonymous probably-German user on a Trek-spin-off BBS. Which just goes to show that this is the right accent after all for me to point out that Ve Haf Vayz Of Making You Speack. Three, for all of the same reasons, this might also explain why the US is in the situation in which it does find itself right now, and it also suggests that Snowden's contribution to said downfall might have been slightly less unique than previously thought. Four, Carré vastly overestimated his fellow man. And Five, it just so happens that the part that they can't tell even me, the bit they absolutely can't speak about even after having said so much, is the bit of information that would prove their point. For said secret, though unspeakable, always happens to conform exactly with their political views. This is heartening, because it shows that the US intelligence trusts, if not the most discreet, at least the most realistic of political actors with its confidence. So, hail Discordia, I guess. I am not applying; may the all-seeing eye look another way.
Yeah, Packard, a lot of people are connected into the US government that does these things. It's the largest employer in the United States. And IIRC, in my case you stated specifically that I wasn't part of that community, your bold emphasized, whereas in fact I've got a lot of ties there and ran systems that worked with them not too many years ago. The intel community is overwhelmingly against Snowden. Not because they are ignorant of what he did, but because they know what he did. These aren't the policy makers - these are the day to day workers whose efforts he undermined, some of them know the people whose lives he put at risk. But feel free to continue to make an ass of yourself. We all do at some time or another, but this is a silly hill to die on.
Stop. What I assumed was, and perhaps I was wrong, that you, personally, bold and emphatic as you are, did not habitually read Presidents' and Chancellors' encrypted communication. Do you?
Funny, you were arguing just in the other thread that you meant any average joe's emails. I was the one who pointed out the difference. Or did you think you were cute because when I said 'we' that meant the US? If so, just silly. I never claimed to have access to any presidential emails. Again, I know the difference. I said you'd be surprised at what I had access to though. I had access to telecom with millions of users, and some of them were high level government officials that used our service instead of official government channels. Including cabinet level officials. I remember when I realized that I had access to the chat room and IMs of the Senate Financial Committee - where they were (legally) conducting insider trading. I joked to my wife that we could be rich. And you know what? I know hundreds of people that had this access. To us, in our circle, it wasn't a big deal. Just part of the job. And I'm sure the same goes with several other posters here. Lots of IT folk, many of them government. It's ludicrous that you think this means we think of ourselves as part of the Illuminati. It does mean we understand the culture, and you are just beginning to learn about it. That doesn't reflect poorly on us, just on your hubris.
You still don't get it, and if you want to, go back to the point where you left on the tangent to say how great US security technology is, or was. Hint: I do not disagree at all with that. Yes, you certainly did say that And that's supposed to reassure us and tell us that Snowden was wrong. And you seriously, sincerely don't see the problem.
Six. I hadn't mentioned it yet, because it's Top Secret (so please keep this among those of us on the board), but I have access to just about everything the US intelligence services know. It's a mental thing. You know, those special powers I have because I fell in a vat of toxic waste when I was a kid. (I was one of the lucky ones who develop special powers; the others ... die.) That's why you should all sit at least 40 inches from your computer screens. Otherwise I can read your thoughts. *Asyncritus watches in amusement — though his mental powers — as half of the people on WF move back away from their screens. *
Oh, you're right. I forgot to mention that part: my father and grandfather both worked for the Post Office, so I have connections to the US government, too.
I absolutely think that government agencies should run their own secure communications. NARA applies, and people like Hillary Clinton and Colin Powell using private communications to circumvent that is a very bad idea. But I also think this is a completely separate issue than government intrusion. Corporations having access to your data is not a 4th amendment issue, which was the basis of Snowden's objections. He was motivated by the intelligence agencies doing that. Yes, the corporations that run your communications have access to your data. Every single user checks a little box that says they understand that as the terms of conditions. It predates this issue by decades - I worked in market research in 1990 and I could find out your name, where you work, when you would be home, your salary, what your purchasing patterns were. Your insurance company has all your medical records. This information was all willingly put out by the users themselves. Should we as a society move away from that? Absolutely. Does that have anything to do with dumping the methods that the US was using to decrypt data? No. Snowden didn't do anything to highlight or change the data economy.
Because like Packard you don't understand the question. These are private business entities. The government should have never farmed out their messaging systems to third parties, but that's not the same thing as saying that the government shouldn't be violating the 4th amendment.
Nice example. And as such he could have read people's mail. And while there were some legal protections in place for electronic communications, they were vastly behind the impact of the technology. Unlike the mail, where simply opening the mail is a federal crime without a warrant. The issue with the patriot act is that congress agreed that you didn't need a warrant for intel agencies to open mail, and that the mail service in question was almost entirely in private, not public hands.
The point is, if the information was provided to foreign entities, there's no way to prove Snowden is responsible.
Seriously? I'm really curious why they chose to inform you in particular? Maybe the CIA doesn't trust us brits?
On a more serious note than anything else I have posted in this thread so far, you might be surprised to know how thoroughly I agree with you. Most religion is nothing more than toxic waste. The only kinds of churches I really like are free associations of people who want to be disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. Small groups, with no political power and extremely limited finances. Enough to keep the lights on if they have a building, for example, and enough to apply Jesus' teaching about helping others. To me, a church that isn't involved in social and humanitarian work (without drawing any benefit from it in terms of recruiting members or something like that) hasn't really understood what Jesus' message was all about. I find it interesting that in the USA, most Evangelicals assume that to be a good Christian, you have to be a Trumpist Republican, while in France most Evangelicals assume that you should be somewhere between centrist (which by American standards would be the left wing of the Democrats) and downright socialist. I don't really agree with either side in terms of political activism, but I certainly am in agreement that helping the poor is more important than buying guns and bombs in order to further your own country's agenda in the world. And I don't see how any honest reading of the Gospels could cause one to think that those wouldn't be Jesus' priorities, too.
Ordinary special connections, or special-special beyond "the FBI and CIA keep an eye on everyone who posts here"? I've tried to rule the world jointly with Kommander, but every time it gets near the end of the game he insists on attacking my Austro-Asian empire. I follow Trump's example and blab to my Dutch acquaintances. Maybe the others are confused about the whole Deutsch thing? I could let you into the loop if you're feeling left out, but mostly it's only nuclear launch codes and what Cabinet members had for breakfast. Well, if it disproved their views, they wouldn't hold those views anymore, right?
I actually did remember that, which is why I added the 'organized'. Can't lose your trust when you're about to spill more military secrets! Seriously, the few Christian friends I know well enough to tell and for whom religion seems to help them be decent rather than sanctimonious evil are almost all in small free churches like you describe. The one exception that comes to mind plans to take over Rome and change it into a force for good.
This I totally agree with. And also the reason I so despise evangelicals in the US. People I know, my sister for example, who are/were wonderful, loving, caring people were brainwashed into this bulshit they call “Christianity”.
Packard is sure that there is both an unimaginably vast conspiracy, and that no one could possibly work for it. "The Washington Post reported in 2010 that there were 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies in 10,000 locations in the United States that were working on counterterrorism, homeland security, and intelligence, and that the intelligence community as a whole includes 854,000 people holding top-secret clearances.[4] According to a 2008 study by the ODNI, private contractors make up 29% of the workforce in the U.S. intelligence community and account for 49% of their personnel budgets.[5]" If you include tertiary groups that provide support, and commercial groups that were legally compelled to work for them, which I and virtually all my friends were in, the number easily rises into the millions. Personally, I'm at least as worried about private corporation data analysis. Hell, we know for a fact that Microsoft was using cameras on kinnects to watch people in their living rooms to microtarget ads based on what they saw, and that there were dolls that told children to confide secrets in them - and then sent those audio files up to the corporation's cloud. You know anybody that works for Microsoft? If you worked in IT, you probably know hundreds.
And you A) Think this is ok. And B) Believe Snowden exposing what those millions of people are doing is ok.
Most of it is, some of it wasn't. My phone listening in on me via microphone and serving up ads to me based on things I said but didn't search for online? That's a far greater invasion of privacy IMO, and serves no possible interest save the greed of the corporation. No, I believe it wasn't OK, because of how he did it. If he had gone straight to the Senate Select Intelligence Committee with his information, he would be a national hero. He didn't, and IMO his actions directly led to the dystopic reality we live in, where a pandemic is raging unchecked and we are being hacked by Russia while the President himself acts to sabotage our ability to defend ourselves, and lies about the nature of the attack to his gullible, violent, and fascist followers.
If he did, he made no mention of it in the 100+ interviews he's given or to the writers of his movie. He did state that ODNI Clapper lying to that committe is what 'caused his breaking point.' Prior to that he had already delivered thousands of documents to three journalists. After that he ran to China, and sent out hundreds of thousands of documents, according to the journalists who received them. These documents are in the hands of Russia and China, per MI6, and regardless of the route they took to get there, the source was Snowden's hack. I suppose something could come out later that indicated he did reach out to said committee, and if so I'd re-evaluate the context. But the guy himself is not a particularly credible source, considering his own self-interest. There'd need to be external validation.
And what self interest would that be? He can never return to the US. He is not profiting from the sale of said documents. He warned his family that they would be in danger and need to request protection. What could he possibly have gained?
His self-interest in staying out of jail for 20-30 years. I'd say that's a pretty strong self-interest to lie now, wouldn't you? So while I wouldn't automatically presume it was a lie, I'd want verification before it passed my skepticism. After all, if he reached out, there should be a contact, or contacts. As to money, he's made $1.2 million in speaking fees and book deals since he fled, and is an international cause de celebre. He's appeared via teleconference at SxSW, TED talks, given keynote addresses at open source conferences, and even showed up at a MIT conference. That's even more money living in a depressed economy in Moscow - where he now works as a tech specialist as a permanent legal resident.
But it doesn’t suggest why he did it in the first place. What possible motivation could he had had to decide “I’m going to ruin my life, my girlfriend’s life, my family’s life all in the hopes that things will turn out wonderfully.”
