Top Secret America

"Nine years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, the United States is assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state homeland security offices and military criminal investigators.

The system, by far the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation's history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of any wrongdoing.

The government's goal is to have every state and local law enforcement agency in the country feed information to Washington to buttress the work of the FBI, which is in charge of terrorism investigations in the United States."

Monitoring America

The terrorists won. And the U.S. government let them. Hell, they helped them.
Original Post
Ok, once more:

We create "Al Queda" in order to facilitate fighting Russia indirectly.

We fund and train this group of operatives out of defense and intelligence budgets for decades, as our allies in a cold war. The future president of the US is the head of the CIA at the time of inception through the training and funding of said group.

If we bought the weapon, aimed and loaded it, then pulled the trigger... I fucking ask you:

Who are the real terrorists?

They are us.

Now do you see why the government are so afraid of us?

Because they re us.
On a recent night in Memphis, a patrol car rolled slowly through a parking lot in a run-down section of town. The military-grade infrared camera on its hood moved robotically from left to right, snapping digital images of one license plate after another and analyzing each almost instantly.

They tried that out with the Pinellas county sheriff here. The cops didn't think it passed the 4th amendment test and declined to buy it. Also they didn't think it was that effective.

Hand-held, wireless fingerprint scanners were carried by U.S. troops during the insurgency in Iraq to register residents of entire neighborhoods. L-1 Identity Solutions is selling the same type of equipment to police departments to check motorists' identities.

That's pretty handy, a lot of times the local cops are arresting people folks with no ID so they can be transported and printed to ascertain their identity. If they can do that at the car it reduces the time they jails spend processing petty shit. You still need pc to run the prints anyway.

edit: or the permission of the subject.

But not everyone is convinced. "It opens a door for all kinds of abuses," said Michael German, a former FBI agent who now leads the American Civil Liberties Union's campaign on national security and privacy matters. "How do we know there are enough controls?"

Very good point. There have been local instances of officers using their terminals in the car to stalk women, harass exes etc. Of course the human element comes into play here. As long as your agency is responsive to complaints it is easy to see who has been looking at what files. The level to which these things are implemented depends on how localities want their local cops to address crime. Local to me police agencies have been loathe to use cameras or other automated system, with the exception of traffic cameras, indicating they felt they were either ineffective or failed to pass constitutional tests. Some areas and agencies will not have these problems and it depends on relative crime levels and how the community wants crime addressed.

The national intel databases are going to be the most problematic for a few reasons. I remember filling out a couple of FIR (field information reports) once with a deputy on some kids we were talking to when I rode along with him one night. The info was sketchy, we found out later that the kids lied to us about a few things. But it was forwarded on to the county database, I assume such things would now pass to a federal database. Since it is removed from the local agency's control it is more opaque that local initiatives such as cameras and fingerprint machines. It is something that various sources have been seeking for years, preventing people from fleeing to another state and avoiding prosecution or tracking. We have to decide as a society if we are ok with this level of Federal power, the ability to compile and monitor data on people in order to prevent or solve crimes such as rape and murder. Much like the health care debate this is about the comfort level of people with the intrusion of the federal government in their lives and it's power over the state. Like that debate it may be worthwhile looking at places that already have such nationwide police resources in place. England or course, but I think most of Europe has some level of national databases that local agencies are tied into. Have they experienced the abuses that we are fearing? Are the fears misplaced?
Originally posted by Boogerhead:
I am pretty sure the nature of sentience is war.

Perpetual and unending war.

It's what we do.

That's pretty depressing. However, in the maelstrom of political, economical, and military events in the U.S. and elsewhere, at least it's a perspective.

Though, if that's true, what is war? What about the seeming (I know, it's not good to anthropomorphize.) hatred between lions and hyenas? Does that mean they have, or are gaining "sentience"? What about baboons?
War is, I think, a ncecssity among a tribe attempting to extend an infinite timeline through a finite resource supply.

Population control = species survival.

Sure, the vast quantities of time and money, resources and labor could have been focused toward getting us off this planet. Pulling anchor and finding more resources, but then what good would all that money the rich have hoarded do them if they can't flaunt it among the poor?

Easier to play god in a small sandbox than it is on a public beach.
Originally posted by Boogerhead:
They ought to have actually charged him with a crime other than distribution.

This guy will do way more time...

Yeah, he didn't STEAL 10 cartons of cigarettes he ROBBED 10 cartons of cigarettes. They act like he just got 7 years for shoplifting. In fact he has multiple convictions, was an active gang member, and threatened to shoot the clerk, indicating he had a gun. Were it your sister or wife you'd want him in prison too. Were he in California (or any other three strike state) he'd be looking at life.

In Texas the clerk would have just shot him. Wink

As far as the Polk county case, the guy is only charged with obscenity, I think the same charge the got Jim Morrison for Smile but if it keeps him from publishing his handbook on how to molest kids I suppose most folks can live with it. Personally, I think they are charging him with the 'crime' of talking about a crime. By the logic that this teaches people how to break the law so it is dangerous would a website about how to pick locks or a TV show that explains forensic procedure in such detail that it could help you commit a murder also be dangerous?
Originally posted by editengine:
...a TV show that explains forensic procedure in such detail that it could help you commit a murder also be dangerous?

That show's more dangerous for other reasons. Most of the stuff they do on it is bullshit, so it's not really a great show for learning about how to avoid the law.

What CSI *does* do is severely inflate the usefulness and accuracy of forensics in the public's (ie, juror's) minds. And because it makes more dramatic (I'm not going to say "better") TV, the focus in CSI: Where-the-fuck-ever is on the more tenuous, flimsiest bits of information. The victim's blood smeared all over the initial suspect's - the guy who's been stalking the victim for months - car? It's a red herring - the REAL killer's obviously the guy whose skin cells were scraped off the aglet of the victim's shoelace.

It's called CSI Effect.

I've said before, I'll say it again: pop culture will destroy us all.
I think you're right. But, you get the point yes? Guilty for putting information out there. Manson was guilty for controlling the killers, not the killing. This creep is guilty of publishing a book. However, I tend to agree with the folks that say there is a time for limits on free speech, and writing a starter kit for pedophiles is one of those times.

Add Reply

Likes (0)