Accrington Web

Accrington Web (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Chat (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/)
-   -   who owns what? (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/who-owns-what-64364.html)

MargaretR 18-06-2013 08:29

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 1063244)
I'll tell you what if GCHQ had to snoop on every Tom Dick or Abdul's emails they be recruiting a hell of a lot more people and using a lot bigger buildings to house um all, like I've always maintain if anybody wants to take a peck into my emails I'll copy um:rolleyes:

They don't need people to snoop - they use 'trigger words' to indicate who needs 'watching'.

jaysay 18-06-2013 08:55

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 1063245)
They don't need people to snoop - they use 'trigger words' to indicate who needs 'watching'.

Better watch your toes then Margaret, they might think there are conspiracies happening around Heron Way:D

DtheP47 18-06-2013 10:05

Re: who owns what?
 
From a Washington website:

Classified National Security Agency programs prevented dozens of terrorist plots, the man in charge of the agency told a Senate panel Wednesday.

National Security Agency (NSA) chief Keith Alexander Alexander said there were “dozens of terrorist events that these [programs] have helped prevent,” referring to the recently disclosed domestic surveillance programs run by the agency.

One program, code-named PRISM, that pulls data from tech companies on foreign Internet users helped to disrupt Najibullah Zazi's plot to bomb New York's subways in 2009.

The second program, allowing the NSA to sweep all cellphones on the Verizon network, played a key role in the federal manhunt for Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who were responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings.

MargaretR 18-06-2013 10:11

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DtheP47 (Post 1063251)
From a Washington website:

Classified National Security Agency programs prevented dozens of terrorist plots, the man in charge of the agency told a Senate panel Wednesday.

National Security Agency (NSA) chief Keith Alexander Alexander said there were “dozens of terrorist events that these [programs] have helped prevent,” referring to the recently disclosed domestic surveillance programs run by the agency.

One program, code-named PRISM, that pulls data from tech companies on foreign Internet users helped to disrupt Najibullah Zazi's plot to bomb New York's subways in 2009.

The second program, allowing the NSA to sweep all cellphones on the Verizon network, played a key role in the federal manhunt for Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who were responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings.

Have you ever considered that what you have reported could be propaganda to justify surveillance.

Government agencies are (and likely have been) capable of arranging 'terror' incidents when it suits their agenda.

cashman 18-06-2013 10:20

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DtheP47 (Post 1063251)
From a Washington website:

Classified National Security Agency programs prevented dozens of terrorist plots, the man in charge of the agency told a Senate panel Wednesday.

National Security Agency (NSA) chief Keith Alexander Alexander said there were “dozens of terrorist events that these [programs] have helped prevent,” referring to the recently disclosed domestic surveillance programs run by the agency.

One program, code-named PRISM, that pulls data from tech companies on foreign Internet users helped to disrupt Najibullah Zazi's plot to bomb New York's subways in 2009.

The second program, allowing the NSA to sweep all cellphones on the Verizon network, played a key role in the federal manhunt for Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who were responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings.

Was it not also that department told us about "Saddams" WMD.?:rolleyes::confused:

DtheP47 18-06-2013 10:48

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 1063254)
Have you ever considered that what you have reported could be propaganda to justify surveillance.

Government agencies are (and likely have been) capable of arranging 'terror' incidents when it suits their agenda.

Key word there for me Margaret "justify"
Nowt wrong with that. ;)

DtheP47 18-06-2013 10:55

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 1063256)
Was it not also that department told us about "Saddams" WMD.?:rolleyes::confused:

Yes Ol.... subsequently confirmed by Wikileaks too.
Granted The WMD diehards* will likely find some comfort in these WikiLeaked documents.
Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up to the war.

*include me in on that

cashman 18-06-2013 10:56

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DtheP47 (Post 1063259)
Key word there for me Margaret "justify"
Nowt wrong with that. ;)

Key question aint there though. Can This department be trusted to tell the truth?:rolleyes:

DtheP47 18-06-2013 10:58

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 1063261)
Key question aint there though. Can This department be trusted to tell the truth?:rolleyes:

see post #107 ;)

cashman 18-06-2013 11:18

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DtheP47 (Post 1063260)
Yes Ol.... subsequently confirmed by Wikileaks too.
Granted The WMD diehards* will likely find some comfort in these WikiLeaked documents.
Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up to the war.

*include me in on that

missed this we posted virtually same time, I have personally always been skeptical of anything the yanks tell us,not that ours are owt to write home about, Its all to do wi Power @ money simple as.;)

MargaretR 18-06-2013 11:32

Re: who owns what?
 
Governments can be super devious and devise the leaking of info by whistleblowers directed to do so. When this happens it is very difficult to comprehend why, but eventually you can see the reasons ...after time.

So there is no good reason to be convinced by anything you are told - by governments and 'whistleblowers' both.

One decision I have arrived at is -
All governments lie to and deceive their populations. When they want to restrict your civil liberties they need to convince you it is neccessary so that you will complacently accept the restrictions. Their biggest fear is revolution and rioting - gaining your approval by propaganda is easier/less expensive.

DtheP47 18-06-2013 12:05

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 1063263)
missed this we posted virtually same time, I have personally always been skeptical of anything the yanks tell us,not that ours are owt to write home about, Its all to do wi Power @ money simple as.;)

Not gonna argue or try to deconstruct what you say Mr C but and Margaret also take please note. It's all about balance, give me a government that is counter balanced by an opposition party. Give me a free press (whatever that entails). Give me the right to free speech. Put it all in a bag and shake it up and good, bad, ugly and downright indifferent some of the time. It does for me. ;)

MargaretR 18-06-2013 12:34

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DtheP47 (Post 1063266)
Not gonna argue or try to deconstruct what you say Mr C but and Margaret also take please note. It's all about balance, give me a government that is counter balanced by an opposition party. Give me a free press (whatever that entails). Give me the right to free speech. Put it all in a bag and shake it up and good, bad, ugly and downright indifferent some of the time. It does for me. ;)

I think that you are politically naive to think that an 'opposition party' offers more than a false display of opposition - they all follow the same agenda directed by banking cartels and multinational corporations. How they go about it varies slightly but the results are the same.

'Free press' is another naive concept which the internet has exposed - the reason why internet monitoring and curbs are proposed.

The truth would endanger the control they excercise over your opinions and lifestyle.

'They' sometimes 'own up' to malpractice in government in order to (falsely) reassure you that your government acts in your interests - it doesn't.

DtheP47 18-06-2013 15:06

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 1063271)
I think that you are politically naive to think that an 'opposition party' offers more than a false display of opposition - they all follow the same agenda directed by banking cartels and multinational corporations. How they go about it varies slightly but the results are the same.

'Free press' is another naive concept which the internet has exposed - the reason why internet monitoring and curbs are proposed.

The truth would endanger the control they excercise over your opinions and lifestyle.

'They' sometimes 'own up' to malpractice in government in order to (falsely) reassure you that your government acts in your interests - it doesn't.

Bit of a Wiki-wander bit wordy but here we go:
The notion of freedom of expression is intimately linked to political debate and the concepts of democracy. Free speech, Free Press, et al’
Research undertaken by the Worldwide Governance Indicators project at the World Bank, indicates that freedom of speech, and the process of accountability that follows it, have a significant impact in the quality of governance of a country. "Voice and Accountability" within a country, defined as "the extent to which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and free media" is one of the six dimensions of governance that the Worldwide Governance Indicators measure for more than 200 countries
In Evelyn Beatrice Hall's biography of Voltaire, she coined the following phrase to illustrate Voltaire's beliefs: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Hall's quote is frequently cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.
I am sure our Wizard of the Inner Clique has paraphrased that on here too in the past.Not that that will affect the price of fish

Less 18-06-2013 15:13

who owns what?
 
Oh dear, do you mean me?
Have I become your target once more?

Gosh, how proud I aught to feel.

Just to make one thing clear, I won't defend your right, if you can jump from one conclusion to another you don't need my help, you cock it up on your own.

Less 18-06-2013 15:46

who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Less (Post 1063298)
Oh dear, do you mean me?
Have I become your target once more?

Gosh, how proud I aught to feel.

Just to make one thing clear, I won't defend your right, if you can jump from one conclusion to another you don't need my help, you cock it up on your own.

Notice something?

I use far less sentences to get my point across!

MargaretR 18-06-2013 15:59

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DtheP47 (Post 1063296)
Research undertaken by the Worldwide Governance Indicators project at the World Bank,

Really!!:rolleyes: - it is in their interests to convince you that what they 'find' is true.

Nowadays if you trust any bank you need your head looking at.

DtheP47 19-06-2013 07:08

Re: who owns what?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Less (Post 1063298)
Oh dear, do you mean me?
Have I become your target once more?

Gosh, how proud I aught to feel.

Just to make one thing clear, I won't defend your right, if you can jump from one conclusion to another you don't need my help, you cock it up on your own.

Give over Less "Target you once more?"
Wouldn't dream of it.
In fact I don't ;)


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:39.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com