Slashdot Mirror


Homeland Security's Space-Based Spying Goes Live

BountyX writes "While America's attention has shifted to the economic meltdown and the presidential race between corporate favorites John McCain and Barack Obama, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) National Applications Office (NAO) 'will proceed with the first phase of a controversial satellite-surveillance program, even though an independent review found the department hasn't yet ensured the program will comply with privacy laws.' NAO will coordinate how domestic law enforcement and 'disaster relief' agencies such as FEMA use satellite imagery intelligence (IMINT) generated by US spy satellites. Based on available evidence, hard to come by since these programs are classified 'above top secret,' the technological power of these military assets are truly terrifying."

50 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 2, Funny

    You never needed to stop. In fact, it made me very sad when you stopped. I had to *pay* for porn again.

  2. In other news... by Robber+Baron · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sales of golf umbrellas and large-brimmed sombreros went through the roof.

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!

    1. Re:In other news... by couchslug · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Sales of golf umbrellas and large-brimmed sombreros went through the roof."

      Fight back, sunbathe naked.

      The sight of thousands of Slashdotters au natural displayed in high resolution should drive off (most) of the human imagery interpreters.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:In other news... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only 13? It must have been at night.

  3. above top secret? by DragonTHC · · Score: 3, Interesting

    that doesn't sound like it's legal. Does DHS have the legal authority to spy on American citizens going about their business? Should it?

    This system sounds like big brother is finally coming online and when you run a red light, the satellite will track you home since only terrorists run red lights!!!!111

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
    1. Re:above top secret? by corsec67 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You seem to be under the impression that the government cares about what is "legal".

      You haven't learned anything in the last... 100 years?

      Just look at (what is left) of the Constitution.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    2. Re:above top secret? by tibman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then limit your lawbreaking to only cloudy days.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    3. Re:above top secret? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Above top secret" doesn't make any sense. This is classified at "top secret" with talent/keyhole code words.

    4. Re:above top secret? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      or this

    5. Re:above top secret? by Kagura · · Score: 3, Informative

      Parent is entirely correct. More generally, it's classified "top secret" with "caveats" that limit it further. It's essentially top secret, but with extra rules. For example, "Top Secret//NOFORN" means "This is classified 'top secret' and it is not to be released to foreign nations."

      Check out this wikipedia page on caveats relating to classified information. That heading and the next three mini-headings pertain to caveats.

      As for the parent, I don't know what "talent" is, but "keyhole" is a kind of imagery spy satellite. I'll bet "talent" is a SIGINT spy satellite, but I'm not going to look it up right now. ;)

    6. Re:above top secret? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Informative

      As for the parent, I don't know what "talent" is, but "keyhole" is a kind of imagery spy satellite. I'll bet "talent" is a SIGINT spy satellite, but I'm not going to look it up right now. ;)

      TOP SECRET-SCI/TK clearance (TK = Talent-Keyhole) is the specific clearance for classified satellite imagery. I don't know nuthin' 'bout that. ;)

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    7. Re:above top secret? by cunina · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just look at (what is left) of the Constitution.

      Obama will save us! Hope and change!

  4. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh, yeah it is! Don't fool yourself. You guys who think you know about imaging have no idea. Just hold your newspaper slanted a bit so they can read over your shoulder. Posted AC on purpose. This is not a joke.

  5. Why haven't we heard of this? by Entiex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So there's this entire questionably legal surveillance system going up. Real big brother type stuff, yet I at least haven't heard of this at all until now, not to mention the US at large. If people who actually watch out for these kinda things don't hear about this, than what's the chance of their actually being public backlash? Yeah so....I'm moving to Sweden.

    1. Re:Why haven't we heard of this? by davester666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One of their rationalizations is that if you have widespread secret spying on your population, but if individuals don't know/can't be told they are being spied on, then there is nothing for the individual to complain about.

      Of course, say, your boss or your bank gets an NSA letter requesting all the information they have about you (but they can't tell you they are doing this), you may just happen to find yourself the first to be laid off if there is some kind of economic downturn (if they wait that long), and you may find getting a loan slightly more difficult (as in, impossible), but it most definitely won't be because of these secretive spy programs. You must just not be a reliable, honest citizen anymore.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  6. Re:Trollish Summary by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am getting really sick of hearing how big corps "picked" Obama and McCain, ... we picked them not Exxon or McDonalds

    Or Newscorp?

    After watching how Ron Paul and Alan Keys were both marginalized by selective non-reporting (despite Paul's recordbreaking fundraising and massive grassroots support), I have no trouble viewing McCain as a corporate pick (or the people's pick from the corporations' small set of approved options). Ditto Obama (and Clinton) vs. Kucinich.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  7. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do you know for certain what they have up there? If not, maybe you should think twice before casually dismissing news you don't like with lame-o "tinfoil hat" responses.

  8. Re:Boon to law-enforcement by SpiderClan · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's my argument for going out naked. I try to explain to the cops that this way they can see I'm not carrying drugs. Thus far my success rate is roughly fail.

  9. Re:Trollish Summary by philspear · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are you sure they didn't marginalize themselves? I would submit that Ron Paul was largely ignored because most voters weren't picking up what he was laying down, and he didn't have the skills to convince them.

    Kucinich likewise is unable to be very convincing. Whenever I read about something he's doing, I agree with him in spirit, but he's not being at all realistic. He's still trying to impeach Bush. I think Bush should be impeached, but it's not going to happen. To keep doing it looks more like masturbation than leading. To be honest, that doesn't just make him a bad canidate, it also would have made him a bad president. Politicians have to be realistic and willing to compromise to get anything done.

    I don't know much about Alan Keys, but my impression was that he was too conservative even for the republican party.

    So is it that Obama and McCain are the corporate pick or the sane pick?

  10. Eyeroll by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...since these programs are classified "above top secret"...

    Cripes, are people really this freakin' dense? Take a look in the dictionary under "top" and figure out what the word means. It means there ain't nuthin' above it!

    The classification levels--- UNCLASSIFIED, CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, TOP SECRET--- are all there are, and simply determine what general degree of security is required. Now, individual subjects or programs will be compartmentalized, which is the more specific degree of access limitation within the general classification (referred to as Sensitive Compartmented Information - SCI and Special Access Programs - SAP). Compartmentalization tells who, where, and how much information can be revealed, and is based entirely on need to know. For example, I had a TOP SECRET clearance when I was in the Army, but I was specifically cleared for only a narrow subset (i.e. a compartment) of TOP SECRET information which pertained to my specific job, that of HUMINT Collector. Since I did not need to know about the whatever the latest hypersonic spy plane test bed is, I could not drive into Area 51 and go look at it, despite it certainly being classified TOP SECRET, and me holding a TOP SECRET clearance. The idea that there's some super-secret classification level above top secret is idiocy spouted by moron UFO conspiracy nutjobs who can't even consult Wikipedia for a simple overview of the classification system.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    1. Re:Eyeroll by MadnessASAP · · Score: 2, Insightful

      *cough*ULTRA*cough

      Sorry, I was going to say that there is a certain precedent for clearence levels so high most people don't even know they exist. That's not to say that it's the case here, just that in general it's would be foolish to think that TOP SECRET is as high as you can go.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    2. Re:Eyeroll by angio · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's only partly true. While the classification system is not classified, the names of specific compartments or special access programs can be and are classified. A nit, but might as well be accurate. :)

    3. Re:Eyeroll by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Informative

      *cough*ULTRA*cough

      Sorry, I was going to say that there is a certain precedent for clearence levels so high most people don't even know they exist. That's not to say that it's the case here, just that in general it's would be foolish to think that TOP SECRET is as high as you can go.

      Jeebus, like I said, you need to read the Wikipedia link, you UFO nutcase.

      First, the uses of "ULTRA" seen in the UFO conspiracy rags is as a caveat to the classification "TOP SECRET".
      Second, there is no caveat of "ULTRA" in the current collection, and no, there are no "secret" caveats. There are classified SCIs and SAPs, but they are never indicated by a single word, much less a meaningful word like "ULTRA".

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    4. Re:Eyeroll by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Informative

      Unfortunately, although you may be technically be right, it doesn't help that the link you provide clearly shows a level of security above 'Top Secret'. Claim that SCI is just a subset of Top Secret all you want

      It is a subset of TOP SECRET. You can tell by how they use the SCI caveat by writing "TOP SECRET-SCI/xxx" when they use it.

      but the fact remains that there are programs out there who's classification level itself is a secret

      Yes, the full name of SCIs and SAPs are classified at the same level as the project itself. That doesn't make it higher than TOP SECRET.

      so if you're not only not allowed to know that the program exists, but also not allowed to know how secret it is... that might be above knowing that something is 'Top Secret'.

      One of the defining characteristics of a secure and workable classification system is that the system itself is completely unclassified. Having parts of the system secret would make it impossible to recognize mishandled material. If (for example) a folder full of UFO data labeled "MEGA SECRET - SUPER-LEET" that got accidentally left in the hands of someone without clearance to know such a level of classification existed, they'd have no reason to believe it was anything but a joke, and would READ IT rather than take it unopened to the closest security, which is what you WANT them to do.

      Really, it's very, very simple.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    5. Re:Eyeroll by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Funny

      When'd you get out? Fellow HUMINTer here.

      2003, but my first stint was back in the good ol' days of the cold war, '87-'93, when we were still called "Interrogator/Linguist".

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    6. Re:Eyeroll by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oops, I was wrong on this point, and it is an important distinction to be made.

      Well... you're both right. Many SCIs and SAPs have their code names classified the same as the programs themselves, but the only the full name of the program is unclassified. For example, there might be a program called BLUE ROOSTER LATERAL, and that name would be classified, but the cover sheet and external program references would be labeled "TOP SECRET - SCI/BRL", and that name reference would not be classified.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    7. Re:Eyeroll by VShael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, but I've got to ask, because I always wondered but never knew someone with a Top Secret clearance.

      Why do they have things like Top Secret Poly (and other qualifiers) which use polygraphs, when the polygraph is a bullshit technology?

    8. Re:Eyeroll by bentcd · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is no level above TOP SECRET because Wikipedia said so. Wow! Who's the frickin nut case? Don't believe everything you read, especially if anybody in the world can edit the gd page you're reading.

      The basic reason why there isn't a level above top secret is very boring and pragmatic: it is imperative that the classification hierarchy is well-known so that personnel that are cleared for lower levels know to avoid material they happen across that is stamped with a higher level.

      For instance, someone cleared for secret might be visiting a facility that holds top secret documents. It is important then for them to be aware that any top secret documents they glance held by the staff or whatever is off-limits to them. If there was a secret classification "ubersecret", someone cleared for secret would not be aware of this and might accidentally start reading such information. When this happens the classification system has failed and so this sort of thing is not practiced.

      Further, as has been pointed out by others in this thread, the ubersecret classification is largely unnecessary anyway since the same effect can be achieved by compartmentalizing top secret.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
  11. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by johnny+cashed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, one could have a good idea of how many satellites they have put up. It is really hard to hide rocket launches. So let me pull a number out of the air: 1000. That is way more than I think they would have up there. Each one is in LEO, so they probably have an orbital period of around 90 min. (max for LEO is 120 min). Now get some idea of how many people they can "track" with that many satellites. Now half it, due to weather. Now half it again, due to day/night cycles. Think really hard, and give me a back of the envelope calculation of just how many targets they could conceivably track.

    If our remote sensing was really as good as the article implies, then US forces wouldn't have been subject to as many IED attacks in Iraq as we have suffered. Now you want me to believe that they can put such resources to work tracking domestic US citizens?

    I'll say it also, satellite imagery isn't all it's made out to be. It ain't that great.

  12. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by ArcherB · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes, so people are 1 pixel.

    HEY! That pixel just flipped me off!

    --
    There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  13. Re:Trollish Summary by pizzach · · Score: 2, Informative

    After watching how Ron Paul and Alan Keys were both marginalized by selective non-reporting (despite Paul's recordbreaking fundraising and massive grassroots support), I have no trouble viewing McCain as a corporate pick (or the people's pick from the corporations' small set of approved options). Ditto Obama (and Clinton) vs. Kucinich.

    Reminds me of the one CBS news story I saw on Ron Paul. The story was on one of *those* Los Vegas places where apparently the ladies where asking for donations for the campaign from the clients. Now I can't help but get the feeling that CBS purposefully went out to look for the one thing about about Ron Paul that would offend the most people, while at the same time avoiding any coverage that would give people any clue who the heck he is in the first place. Meh.

    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
  14. USA, Lost its way! by 278MorkandMindy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is yet another reason that USA appears to have lost its way.
    FTFA "But as the Journal reported, Congress' "partial funding" for the program in "a little-debated $634 billion spending measure," "

    Now assume for a second that this funding figure is correct, (the article reads a little like one of those conspiracy theory types are writing it) WTF is congress thinking?

    The country is in meltdown that will NOT be stopped, the healthcare system is screwed (I am waiting for our system in Australia to fall that far) and congress thinks it is ok to spend that sort of money on spying on people?

    I cheered when the first bailout bill failed. I hoped that it represented an outbreak of common sense. I hoped that the bailout would save the little guy, but NOT the banks.

    This is the result of needing to have increasing profit, needing to have ways to make money that have ZERO actual use to the economy/population (they don't create anything, they don't help anyone, they just exist for people to gamble to make money)

    Take a step back, large debt is bad. Always needing growth will eventually bite back.

    To be on topic, this kind of spending seems to be indicative that NO lessons have been learned OR that the common man is as truly helpless as the "fat cats" seem to think

  15. Great... by actionbastard · · Score: 2, Funny

    Another reason to never go outside. Ever.

    --
    Sig this!
  16. Re:The obvious reality... by davester666 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You think it's funny, but it's not.

    Google (well, Google's partner who actually own and put up the satellite, Google just licensed the data for online viewing), requires permission from the US gov't to put up a satellite.

    As part of getting a license to do so, Google had to agree to:
    a) give the US gov't access to the raw data for ALL images that the satellite takes
    b) requires that images for civilian use is downsampled (I forget what the resolution that us plebs can view)

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  17. Limited utility by Jzanu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Considering the cost of these satellites and the relatively small amount of attitude control fuel, I can not see much use here. Drone aircraft are cheaper, and are effectively invisible at high altitudes. Especially since the shuttle is being retired, and the U.S. has no other satellite maintenance platforms.

  18. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by Daengbo · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm going to open my mouth when I probably shouldn't, but I've been out of the intel field for enough years that no one is going to get pissed off for me talking.

    Satellite imaging is really pretty good. Better than you think. The military stuff is excellent. Imagine what we're doing now with atmospheric telescopes that we couldn't have done twenty years ago and realize that the same principles apply when the direction is reversed.

    What really pisses me off is that I would have gone to jail back in the day for what they are green-lighting now. Much less than that, even. Disgusting.

    I'm really glad I left all that intel stuff behind or I would end up in jail when I refused to follow orders.

  19. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll say it also, satellite imagery isn't all it's made out to be. It ain't that great.

    Then why have it? It is built for surveillance or why would you have it. Obviously it doesn't have to be that great to be useful and is meant to be used with other apparatus (that doesn't exist in Iraq) to achieve it's goals. Saying this is a means to justify feeling comfortable living in a police state and maintain the illusion of freedom. It doesn't matter what it can or can't do, what matters is what it is for.

    Benjamin Franklin said that the constitution (for all it's flaws) wouldn't save America from despotism, and as the mechanism's have been put in place incrementally, we see he was right.

    I wonder how hot the water is for the frog now?

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  20. Pft by inKubus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The stupid stuff that happened in the 60's and 70's != 9/11 pal. TOTALLY different in every way. To combine the two is like saying that McCain's torture has something to do with his erratic behavior, or the fact that he's a child molester. Ok, bad example.

    The FOUNDERS of this country were terrorists in the eyes of King George. But what they did was fight to create a better situation for themselves. You saw that again in the 60's and 70's with civil rights and the youth movement. Yes, the Weather Underground were a bunch of idiots but it's important to note that the changes some of their peers helped bring about have made this country a massively better place for everyone. And anyway, the real fear is religious fanatics with a nuclear weapon, not some dumb kids with pipe bombs.

    And you sir are a fool to think that it has anything to do with "WAR". It's just that war epitomizes the separation of class. In the 70's there were drastic (though not as drastic as today) gaps between rich and poor. A horrible economy, an unending war, caused by foolish leadership, taken advantage of by the rich while the poor starve and are jobless, well, what's worse than that?

    What this is doing is placing still more power, surveilence power (control), into the hands of a few people in the government. The same people who have pretty much given the government to corporations they formerly ran, and now are giving 700B to the same people. It's in the largest worldwide corporations' interest to A. have control of a government B. Erase worldwide borders caused by multiple currencies/legal systems/etc. "War" rarely physically involves the rich, unless it's a passtime they get off on. It's about money. Now what we have are the makings for a massive shift in government, from multiple countries to one world government. It is 100% enevitable. The people who control the wealth of the world talk to one another, you know. And it sure would be simpler for them if they didn't have to mess with different legal systems..

    WWII was between capitalism (The allies), corporatism or fascism (the axis), and communism (the Soviets/China). We the U.S. were actually on the fence and were supporting both the forces of corporatism and capitalism. See also The New Deal. The problem is that the American constitution has separated public and private as much as it does church and state. In the end, money won. The plans showed that if we joined with England, Germany could be beaten. Frankly, there were just more English decended families in power in congress at the time. Obviously in Germany corporatism was over-stateist and led by a madman, which led to extremes that made the choice a no-brainer. The important thing to note is that it was not the economic policy of Hitler but rather other more personal reasons that caused us to ally with the Allies. Likewise, Japan bombed us because they were invading China and the Phillipines, whom we had relations with/had a territory. So, it was a no-brainer.

    But NOW, we have an entirely different power structure. There are many "free market" scholars who have long admired the structure of corporatism. So, you see some of these people's last gasp in the political arena as trying to make this leap. And so, just as Bush Cheney has broken the barriers of Church and State, they have also broken the barriers of public and private. And in many ways they have flat out BROKEN the LAW (and the constitution). They declared early that the president decides the law, so they made up their own book. And with Globalism, what will be the enevitable structure of this one world government? Not capitalism, that's for growth. Not communism, that's for stagnation. No, a perfectly controlled business environment, neo-corporatism, with some facets of democracy.

    So now the competing philosophies in the high end of world leadership are differing only by what to do with US, the worker bees. I think corporatism could wo

    --
    Cool! Amazing Toys.
  21. Re:Trollish Summary by WiiVault · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes clearly our media has an agenda. But my "trollish" point is that we are in the end responsible for what happens in our country. The truth is out there, there are thousands of websites which provide many different perspectives. The media can be evil, but we are foolish if we buy into everything we hear without a little fact checking. But hey since pointing out the obvious is burning my karma maybe I should just shut up.

  22. Re:Trollish Summary by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 2, Informative

    CNN has had three articles written by Ron Paul about the tanking economy and election in the last month. Two that I know of were linked from the front page. Barely a peep about him when he was running for President.

  23. Re:Trollish Summary by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Again, what indication do you have that any of their messages would have resonated with a largely apathetic, willfully ignorant american public?

    I contest your characterization of the American public.

    Ron Paul effectively got exposure ONLY on the internet - which the Old Media were unable to gatekeep - and by word of mouth. His message had VERY broad appeal - among Republicans, Democrats, Independents, new voters, old voters who had given up and dropped out, ... (If he'd gotten started 9 months earlier and the rate had kept up he'd have taken the nomination handily - and the presidency as well.) He broke the all-time one-day fundraising record, pulling in millions of dollars from hundreds of thousands of contributors averaging about $100 each, while his support in polls was still single-digit.

    His message is an old one: Freedom, limited government. And it is the SAME message that has a track record of doing this same sort of mass-movement-inspiration in the past, resulting in the American Revolution and the creation of the current government (among its other success stories).

    Given the message's historic track record (especially among downtrodden elite-ridden "huddled masses") and Ron's personal record using it, I have little doubt that it was only the lack of exposure in, and distortion by, the old media that is responsible for his continued marginalization.

    I think their messages have merit, but they didn't get any traction because most people weren't already convinced, not because they were ignored by the media.

    And how does one convince them if they don't hear the arguments? Since the message is very convincing WHEN IT'S DELIVERED, it's specifically "being ignored (or distorted and libeled) by the media" that is the missing link.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  24. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by DerekLyons · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm going to open my mouth when I probably shouldn't, but I've been out of the intel field for enough years that no one is going to get pissed off for me talking.

    I'm going to get pissed at you - not for giving up secrets, but for talking out of your ass. And for trying to make us believe that even though you've been out 'long enough' which implies you aren't familiar with current tech. (And you show you aren't even up on what's publicly known.)
     
     

    Satellite imaging is really pretty good. Better than you think. The military stuff is excellent.

    Satellite imaging is OK, but less impressive than you might think. Resolution is much less than fiction/Hollywood would have you believe, and coverage isn't real time. If a bird isn't available (and it rarely is) when what you want to see is going down, you are SOL.
     
     

    Imagine what we're doing now with atmospheric telescopes that we couldn't have done twenty years ago and realize that the same principles apply when the direction is reversed.

    Horseshit. Adaptive optics depend on seeing a guide star created by a laser, something you can't do with a satellite. There's also a technique involving taking multiple images and analyzing them - you can't do that from a satellite either as it moves too quickly.

  25. Re:abuse vs. misuse by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That said, considering the present-day prominence (and a comfortable life of a tenured professor) of an anti-war protester turned terrorist [nytimes.com] (to this day unrepentant), the Maryland cops' action is not that unconscious...

    Yes it is. If he did something illegal, arrest and charge him. If he didn't, then he should be considered on an equal footing to every other innocent man. You do not get to come up with an arbitrary third category of "didn't break the law but I still don't like him" and then persecute people in that category.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  26. Re:Too much Enemy Of The State by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't know anything about the quality of the images of the latest military and NSA spy satellites.

    All you know is that your government can do no wrong. OK, you don't know anything about that, either - despite the indelible lessons of this entire decade.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  27. Any memory gaps? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Funny

    The article does sound rather garish, but considering systems within systems, parallel to systems, and funky classifications invented by paranoid department heads and Dick Cheney coming up with his own stamps with his own classifications of, "Shhh. Don't Tell Anyone" I find it hard to believe that things are nearly so well-ordered as you portray.

    Do you have any odd memory gaps or personality quirks which you didn't have before you entered the service? Even if there has been zero improvement over the mind control systems used in the Seventies, then chances are you wouldn't even suspect a violation.

    After all. . , is posting in widely read public forums to boast about credentials an encouraged activity for a HUMINT Collector?

    You're fishy as hell regardless of what your real story happens to be, and if you are what you say you are, then you're probably a lot further gone than you realize. You have my sincere condolences if that's the case.

    -FL

  28. The public knowledge of feasible technology today. by crhylove · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The public knowledge of feasible technology today is laughably behind. We've had radically advanced aircraft since the late 50s that are still not publicly disclosed, other than a few blueprints due to the FOIA.

    http://www.cufon.org/cufon/Silverbug.pdf

    That is just the aircraft our government has not disclosed to the public. With advances in computers, satellites, and optics, is there any question that some part of our government can see almost anything on the planet, at any time? This combined with the universal wire tapping that has gone through and still in place....

    We live in a society where the government can see everything you do, hear everything you do, does not count the votes at all, and even if they did count the votes, the media makes sure you are not informed about any valid candidates that are not completely beholden to the corporations that now run and control everything.

    The Bill of Rights has been almost completely removed, the Constitution is almost completely void, and there is almost no military chance to revolt.

    This is why I'm not breeding. I don't want to breed slaves.

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  29. Re:Don't forget... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  30. Re:And.... by pimpimpim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, the UK seems to be doing just fine with their high CCTV coverage: last year they had 4.2 million cameras, and the number is increasing. The effectiveness of all this is of minor importance, as long as now they can be used to catch some child murderer every now and then, so the population is pleased. When the huge infrastructure is there, the rest will be done by currently still to be developed technology to do complete tracking of people. I don't think we are very far off, though.

    --
    molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
  31. Re:The public knowledge of feasible technology tod by Digital+End · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ending your genetic chain isn't a victory... having kids that will bring the fucking thing down is... or growing the balls to bring it down for your kids.

    --
    Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master.
  32. Re:also, US Army troops now deployed against citiz by lamapper · · Score: 2, Insightful

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/24/army/print.html

    Not sure why that hasn't made Slashdot yet. It's huge. Far bigger than just a satellite spying on us.

    I do not blame you for posting as AC.... I know that even though I post this information for others to look at and decide for themselves, just by posting it a certain percentage will label me a conspiracy nut and I might even get modded as trying to cause problems when I am just acknowledging that I too have heard about (article) this and am providing additional information for people to chew on and think about.

    The USA is slowly being turned into a police state so that we can be controlled, systematically taking away freedoms from Americans. This site suggests there are over 800 camps around the USA. Here is a video about a FEMA camp in Indiana, supposedly closed in 1933, but has received funding within the last two years as a amtrak - train maintenance facility.

    I heard Alex Jones on Coast to Coast, here is a link to his website infowars. Supposedly he predicted not just the current collapse over two years ago, but nailed the reason as sub-prime markets...I need to find the document with the date he first made the prediction. My Realtor and mortgage broker friends knew the Real Estate bubble would burst over 2 years back. As a Notary/Signing Agent we talked about what was going on. As a person who participated in the RTC bailout, I am not surprised that it is happening again. My friends 2 to 2 1/2 years ago did not tie the bubble bursting to the sub prime market as Alex supposedly did.

    Per the show, Alex got interested in how the government worked in High School and has actively looked into many issues for well over 20 years. The amount of information he has is incredible...again, check it out for yourself.

    Not only did he sound very, very credible, he stated that there is so much dis-information being put online much in his name that he sometimes has 50 - 100 utube videos removed that are slandering him, all posted in the same 24 hour period. If you listen to the recorded show you will hear it in his words, but he basically is very well known at utube and once they verify it is him, the videos are instantly yanked. When someone is attacked so ardently as he obviously is, someone does not want you and I to know or think too much about what he is saying. Again listen yourself and form your own opinion.

    I ask myself, what do they NOT want me to know. There is a reason they distract us from what is really going on with other things.

    Supposedly he has a document that shows the Banking groups' plans that they are currently following now...supposedly leaked by someone when they left the Federal Reserve system. I need to look for it and provide a link. He stated on the show, that they are not doing anything in secret but instead are following a well thought out and detailed plan. This same template has been used to take the physical assets of other countries using that country's own banks and currency to do it. The documents state that the countries were expected to default on the loans the group of banks provided. I believe the details are in this video End Game, however I am not a subscriber so I have not watched it yet.

    I also admit that I currently do not have three or more sources for this information, so it is up to you to decide for yourself.

    I personally don't believe there are as many coincidences as many would like for us to believe. I find it very coinci

    --
    Is your Internet Throttled? Install DD-Wrt, OpenWRT or Tomato to learn the truth! Google: 1Gbps/1Gbps: 5 Communities