The OWS protests are practically useless when it comes to actually getting something concrete done. Complaining about something is one thing but unless you focus on offering viable solutions all you get is tear gas and busted heads. The Tea Party movement focused on specific and straightforward issues that didn't take a genius to understand. Basically lowering the amount of government interference in business (ie deregulation) and eliminating government involvement in foreign adventures. They kept their message simple where as the OWS protesters are all over the place. (I am not saying I agree with the Tea Party I just think the way they went about organizing themselves produced concrete results in the last elections) As the OWS protests continue more and more disruptive elements will start getting involved and start using tactics to goad law enforcement into taking aggressive actions and that will do nothing but obscure the real issues being protested. The protest focus will turn from criticizing income equality and overall corporate behavior to focusing on the police response.
One additional item. Corporations are vulnerable to citizen protests but the protests would be a lot more effective if the protesters targeted all their energy on individual corporations one at a time instead of going after an entire industry. CEOs and Board members really don't like being constantly hounded by protesters, cameras, and ambush interviews. Public corporations are required by law to publish a great deal of their business information and finding disgruntled employees or ex-employees can provide even more ammunition to use in the protests. Forensic accountants can review P/L and overall earning documents to identify misleading information. Most citizens have a hard enough time balancing their checking account let alone deciphering complex corporate finance reports. Most Corporate lobbying groups are also required by law to publish documents related to their operations and a little investigating you can even uncover the politicians who interact with the lobby groups affiliated with the corporation and in today's political environment politicians stand to lose a substantial amount of support if they are identified as being in the pocket of a lobbying group and the proof needed to make these connections are readily available. President Obama made a promise to refuse lobbyist money in his re-election campaign but he has used non-registered lobbying groups and 3rd parties to evade the spirit of his promise.
I seem to recall MS faced a few lawsuits from the Federal government a few years back that resulted in them paying some substantial financial penalties and agree to operation changes monitored my the court. Corporations deserve the spotlight to highlight and address their questionable practices. There are several really important changes I would like to see in regards to the corporate use of offshore tax havens and I think some corporations based in the US should be required to employee a certain percentage of US citizens before they offshore their labor force. I don't propose they should be prevented from using offshore labor but there should be some limits set if they would like to keep all the goodies the US provides to corporations in the form off tax breaks.
Your statement is based on the premise that we have already reached a total understanding on how the universe actually works. The vast majority of our knowledge base in particle and energy related physics is based on mathematical models combined with a lot of assumptions. The majority of our knowledge in astrology related physics depend on the validity of the fine-structure constant and the theories of dark matter or dark energy needed to make the math work. So far we have evidence that the fine-structure constant appears to vary depending on which part of the universe you are looking at.
I feel that the non-state actors present a greater danger when their patrons start getting backed into a corner via sanctions and threats. The Iranian sanctions have damaged Iran more than they are willing to admit and unless they are willing to modify some of their policies they might think they have no alternative. The Supreme Council ruling Iran does not care about the effects on their citizens they are only interested in maintaining their power. regardless of the cost.
The WMD intelligence was weak but that intelligence was provided and vetted by multiple security agencies representing multiple countries. The WMD evidence was not even the primary issue that was being argued over when lining up international support for the attack. The primary concern was the impact to the business interests that the Europeans, Russians, Chinese, and to a much smaller extent the Americans had with Iraq. Saddam also did his part in contributing to the WMD problem with his own actions by making other countries think he had capabilities that he didn't have. He was trying to prevent attacks by basically bluffing and it was called. As far as targeting foreigners I don't think US constitution and legal protections apply. If it introduces fear and causes people to think twice before using violence against US interests then it has it's uses. Example: The Arab animosity towards Israel has never been about land. They feel emasculated and humiliated by their defeats at the hands of the Israelis over the past 65+ years. Unfortunately they have taken out most of their frustration by beating their women, using hospitals, schools, and Mosques to launch attacks knowing that the reprisals would kill non-combatants so they could then use those deaths to manipulate international opinions. And the real kicker is that they fear Israel and especially the Mossad because Israel was willing to engage them with the same level of callous violence they used on their own populations. They also have ample evidence that Israel has no problem ignoring any other countries complaints when it comes to their security interests. Before 9/11 no foreign group really feared the CIA or MI5 because even though their actions might have crossed the line occasionally they were nothing when compared to the Mossad. Prior to 9/11 US reprisals to terrorist attacks were weak and ineffective and offered no deterrent to future attacks. I think that particular problem has now been addressed. The problem with defining people as "Freedom Fighters" is determining exactly what "freedoms" they are fighting for. The freedom to subjugate entire populations into barbaric 7th century tribal systems along with the freedom to export this type of system to their neighbors and beyond is a questionable freedom. I am not going to be spending much time wringing my hands over the legalities of targeting foreign adversaries even if there is collateral damage. Humans have been killing one another ever since there were enough of us to chose sides and bash each other over the head with clubs for a bigger cave. The only difference today is that we have better clubs.
Capitalism seems to perpetuate competition that both the citizens and companies participate in. The premise being the more successful you are the higher standard of living you will obtain. In a strictly enforced communist or extreme socialist based system the incentive to better yourself is reduced because those who chose not to educate themselves or dedicate themselves to hard work receive the same benefits as those who chose the exact opposite. The equal distribution of rewards (ie money) across an entire population only ensures that everyone is equally poor except of course for the people at the top who are implementing and enforcing the system. The people marching for more economic equality have valid concerns but any real changes will probably effect their grand children more than it would help them. The extremists who support bringing the current system crashing down in total are taking the very real chance that the resulting chaos and anarchy will eclipse the level of suffering people are experiencing today by a long shot.
We have mousetrapped ourselves in the ever escalating cycle of security precautions. We complain about the inconveniences and then as soon as an attack happens we clamor for even more security measures. People just need to accept that life has risks and while you can try to mitigate the risks you are never going to succeed 100%. I also despise the word "terrorist" in describing the attacks or using it to label any particular group. They attacks can be more accurately described as organized murder. The vast majority of people in the US are not walking around terrified about anything except the economy. I have a feeling that those who are labeled as "terrorists" are the ones experiencing real terror in their daily lives. Walking around constantly scanning the sky looking for a Hellfire missile coming down on them probably results in a lot of sore necks.
I've visited China 3 times in the past 5 years and if you get outside of the major cities most of the people you see have not prospered as much as those in the big cities. I enjoyed all my visits to China but I still wonder how an elite class of millionaires and billionaires get created in a system publicly advertised as adhering to communist principles and focused at providing equality across the board for the average worker.
" stopping terrorist acts by searching people before boarding planes" When it comes to terrorist attacks the fear is not so much about the attack itself it is about who gets blamed for letting the attack succeed in the first place. We never blame the actual terrorists anymore we only blame those who didn't prevent the attack from succeeding. I have not heard of anyone filling lawsuits against Al-Qaeda or any of it's brethren. Instead the airlines get sued and any government official (local or national) any where in the vicinity gets hammered for incompetence.
Technically speaking China would probably have the highest number of users or potential users based on population. However, I don't think people making $2 an hour have obtaining a smart phone at the top of their got to have list.
The problem today is that MAD is no longer a sure thing. It was an effective means in keeping the 5 most powerful countries from initiating another WW2 type war. Hell the US and USSR were setup to destroy then entire planet several times over by pushing a few buttons. That potential holocaust was able to keep even the most rabid militarists on both sides firmly under control. However, the smaller countries seeking nuclear weapons today are degrading the effectiveness of the MAD theory. Countries like N. Korea, Iran, and Pakistan openly use non-state actors to project power in their regions. I can just picture some idiot in Iran, N. Korea, or Pakistan selling a nuke to it's proxies to use as they see fit. A nuclear device transported by ground to it's intended target area leaves no missile tracks to immediately identify who set it off. It wouldn't take long AFTER the detonation to figure out where the bomb was most likely manufactured but by that time an immediate reprisal would not be a foregone conclusion. Using non-state actors creates some wiggle room in the traditional MAD response.
"NSA's secret sub-sonic earthquake machine accidently hit Turkey instead of Iran"
Thanks for the perfect example of conspiracy driven assertion. I really hope you are just joking about the secret earthquake machine.
The root of the problem is that teachers at 1-12 grade levels have always been terribly underpaid. If a society wants to produce educated people they should start at the very beginning of the educational process. The second crucial component is the students themselves. The students must accept responsibility for their choices. You can go through the best school systems in the world and still come out as an idiot.
Yeah I am going to put my trust in a group called "Anonymous" to help bring transparency to government and corporation activities. Most of the documents released have been rather less than earth shaking. And there is nothing stopping the counter intelligence agencies (government or corporate) from creating documents that when examined in depth turn up to be false. In other words it is easy raise the level of doubt in the information released. The Internet in general is not the harbinger of truth and justice it is the most effective tool ever devised for creating and managing dis-information to the masses. The great information age is creating an environment of nothing but distrust, conspiracy theories, and revisionist proclamations that are leading to nothing but confusion and anger.
"dictators couldn't go about their merry genocidal ways by making their actions legal in the country they ruled." The ICC does not have the means to enforce there judgment. The ICC can issue all the accusations and charges they want but unless they can arrest the dictator and bring him to court the dictator will be able to continue running his country any way he wants. Laws, both international and domestic, are meaningless without the ability to apply force when needed to enforce the law.
I don't care about anti-US sentiments in Europe or any other place in the world. I visited 14 countries over the past 3 years and the only animosity I encountered was from a drunk in an English pub. For some reason he was determined to blame me for all the US actions. However, once I explained to him that I was not the guy in charge and nobody in the US government solicited my opinion prior to making their decisions he went away.
The ICC mandate is to prosecute criminal actions in other countries if the country where the alleged crime was committed doesn't prosecute it. However, if the country involved has investigated the accusations and decided not to prosecute the ICC can claim jurisdiction. A case such as this would effectively allow double jeopardy which is specifically prohibited in the US judicial system. Your "bully mentality" remark is nothing but the end result of the never ending propaganda effort that allows other countries to blame all of their problems on a 3rd party which usually means the US. Thankfully this trend is creating an bipartisan political support for the US to scale back it's international footprint and finally let others deal with their own problems for a change.
International Laws are nothing more than pieces of paper. Laws require the ability to enforce them which does not exist today. International Laws also require a country to relinquish their sovereignty which will never happen. International laws and organizations like the ICC are driven by politics not justice.
"but time and time again the courts are ruling that the fourth amendment doesn't protect people who use modern technology" Can you provide some examples of this. Remember the law enforcement agencies can and do commit actions that infringe on the rights defined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights but it is the Judicial Branch that enforces these rights. Evidence is ruled inadmissible in a lot of court cases. One of the main reasons the government created Guantanamo was because the evidence they had would not be admissible in the US court system. That fact does not mean the person is innocent it just means the evidentiary procedures are not clearly defined for non-US citizens and actions committed outside of the US. Do the rights in the US system apply to the entire world? Can certain offences fall under the the Geneva Conventions? And if the Geneva Conventions are invoked there are specific rules that can be harsh. Any combatant not wearing or displaying any ensignia to identify them as combatants can be summarily executed. That rule alone could apply to all of the non-state combatants captured on any battlefield. It seems to me that at a minimum the US probably should adhere to the legal requirements where the crime was committed but in countries like Afghanistan there are no formal rights for their citizens. The US system is far from perfect but it does provide an adversarial relationship between those who charge people of crimes and those who determine if the charges violated the defendants rights.
The government has always had the means to collect information on it's citizens. Tax Returns, real estate records, banking records, school registration records, public utility bills, telephone books, drivers licenses, and other information has always been available it just took longer to get it. Just like the limits and caveats included in the Freedom of Speech or Assembly the to Privacy does not translate to the right of total anonymity.
Evidently you never visited E. Germany before the wall came down or spent any time in Iran, Yemen, Syria, N. Korea, or any similar countries recently. Data mining is used by everyone not just the government. The most dangerous online groups are criminals looking to collect credit card and other information they can use in a criminal enterprise. Most of the people complaining today about privacy issues are the same morons posting their life history on Face book. If you chose to participate in today's online world don't be surprised when your information becomes public. And yes, the US government does have the ability to collect massive amounts of data being transmitted through the Internet and mobile device infrastructure but even with sophisticated mining algorithms they are limited in how much data they can truly process. If the government becomes interested in your online activities it is usually because someone has pointed them in your specific direction.
"It is (or should be) common knowledge that the three letter agencies (and a bunch you've never heard of) spy on Americans on an ongoing basis."
So you are saying all this spying is common knowledge but your next statement proclaims "We can't find out just what they are doing because it is classified", well then how in the hell did it become common knowledge? Are you just making shit up to support your own paranoid fantasies? You re-enforce this pattern further by stating "we can't prove we were spied upon because it's classified". This type of circular reasoning is just one more example of people creating their own "facts" by cherry picking facts or statements out of context . believing anything a "leaker" claims to be true without question, and creating conspiracy theories to tie all of your unsupported nonsense together in an effort to validate your world view.
I also believe that the technology is not the only or even the most important deciding factor in military success. Right now the US is the only country able to project significant military power globally. (outside of ICBM's of course) This includes aircraft carriers, ground troops and assets, and all the supplies needed during war. Without effective logistic capabilities in major combat operations the technology comes in 2nd place. Some examples would include when China was really itching to take possession of Taiwan. It wasn't Taiwan's weapon technology preventing them from invading it was the fact that they did not have the capability to move the amount of ground troops and supplies that would have been needed after the initial artillery and missile attacks were over. They would have had to break out the "million man swim" battle plan to actually take the country. Germany needed civilian trains just to get their relatively small amount of troops to Afghanistan. The British needed to use civilian cruise ships during their war with Argentina to get their soldiers and supplies to the battle field.
If you paid your dues I would definitely start trying to get your money back because evidently you don't know what the hell you are talking about. There are just as many, if not more, "idiots" who use Linux or any other non-MS products swamping the help desks. If you are to stupid to face this simple fact you should probably find another line of work. And you might not be a complete hater but you certainly qualify as a complete moron.
Slashdot Mirror
The OWS protests are practically useless when it comes to actually getting something concrete done. Complaining about something is one thing but unless you focus on offering viable solutions all you get is tear gas and busted heads. The Tea Party movement focused on specific and straightforward issues that didn't take a genius to understand. Basically lowering the amount of government interference in business (ie deregulation) and eliminating government involvement in foreign adventures. They kept their message simple where as the OWS protesters are all over the place. (I am not saying I agree with the Tea Party I just think the way they went about organizing themselves produced concrete results in the last elections) As the OWS protests continue more and more disruptive elements will start getting involved and start using tactics to goad law enforcement into taking aggressive actions and that will do nothing but obscure the real issues being protested. The protest focus will turn from criticizing income equality and overall corporate behavior to focusing on the police response.
One additional item. Corporations are vulnerable to citizen protests but the protests would be a lot more effective if the protesters targeted all their energy on individual corporations one at a time instead of going after an entire industry. CEOs and Board members really don't like being constantly hounded by protesters, cameras, and ambush interviews. Public corporations are required by law to publish a great deal of their business information and finding disgruntled employees or ex-employees can provide even more ammunition to use in the protests. Forensic accountants can review P/L and overall earning documents to identify misleading information. Most citizens have a hard enough time balancing their checking account let alone deciphering complex corporate finance reports. Most Corporate lobbying groups are also required by law to publish documents related to their operations and a little investigating you can even uncover the politicians who interact with the lobby groups affiliated with the corporation and in today's political environment politicians stand to lose a substantial amount of support if they are identified as being in the pocket of a lobbying group and the proof needed to make these connections are readily available. President Obama made a promise to refuse lobbyist money in his re-election campaign but he has used non-registered lobbying groups and 3rd parties to evade the spirit of his promise.
I seem to recall MS faced a few lawsuits from the Federal government a few years back that resulted in them paying some substantial financial penalties and agree to operation changes monitored my the court. Corporations deserve the spotlight to highlight and address their questionable practices. There are several really important changes I would like to see in regards to the corporate use of offshore tax havens and I think some corporations based in the US should be required to employee a certain percentage of US citizens before they offshore their labor force. I don't propose they should be prevented from using offshore labor but there should be some limits set if they would like to keep all the goodies the US provides to corporations in the form off tax breaks.
Your statement is based on the premise that we have already reached a total understanding on how the universe actually works. The vast majority of our knowledge base in particle and energy related physics is based on mathematical models combined with a lot of assumptions. The majority of our knowledge in astrology related physics depend on the validity of the fine-structure constant and the theories of dark matter or dark energy needed to make the math work. So far we have evidence that the fine-structure constant appears to vary depending on which part of the universe you are looking at.
For a country that has gotten rid of their manufacturing how come they are still ranked is #1?
I feel that the non-state actors present a greater danger when their patrons start getting backed into a corner via sanctions and threats. The Iranian sanctions have damaged Iran more than they are willing to admit and unless they are willing to modify some of their policies they might think they have no alternative. The Supreme Council ruling Iran does not care about the effects on their citizens they are only interested in maintaining their power. regardless of the cost.
The WMD intelligence was weak but that intelligence was provided and vetted by multiple security agencies representing multiple countries. The WMD evidence was not even the primary issue that was being argued over when lining up international support for the attack. The primary concern was the impact to the business interests that the Europeans, Russians, Chinese, and to a much smaller extent the Americans had with Iraq. Saddam also did his part in contributing to the WMD problem with his own actions by making other countries think he had capabilities that he didn't have. He was trying to prevent attacks by basically bluffing and it was called. As far as targeting foreigners I don't think US constitution and legal protections apply. If it introduces fear and causes people to think twice before using violence against US interests then it has it's uses. Example: The Arab animosity towards Israel has never been about land. They feel emasculated and humiliated by their defeats at the hands of the Israelis over the past 65+ years. Unfortunately they have taken out most of their frustration by beating their women, using hospitals, schools, and Mosques to launch attacks knowing that the reprisals would kill non-combatants so they could then use those deaths to manipulate international opinions. And the real kicker is that they fear Israel and especially the Mossad because Israel was willing to engage them with the same level of callous violence they used on their own populations. They also have ample evidence that Israel has no problem ignoring any other countries complaints when it comes to their security interests. Before 9/11 no foreign group really feared the CIA or MI5 because even though their actions might have crossed the line occasionally they were nothing when compared to the Mossad. Prior to 9/11 US reprisals to terrorist attacks were weak and ineffective and offered no deterrent to future attacks. I think that particular problem has now been addressed. The problem with defining people as "Freedom Fighters" is determining exactly what "freedoms" they are fighting for. The freedom to subjugate entire populations into barbaric 7th century tribal systems along with the freedom to export this type of system to their neighbors and beyond is a questionable freedom. I am not going to be spending much time wringing my hands over the legalities of targeting foreign adversaries even if there is collateral damage. Humans have been killing one another ever since there were enough of us to chose sides and bash each other over the head with clubs for a bigger cave. The only difference today is that we have better clubs.
Capitalism seems to perpetuate competition that both the citizens and companies participate in. The premise being the more successful you are the higher standard of living you will obtain. In a strictly enforced communist or extreme socialist based system the incentive to better yourself is reduced because those who chose not to educate themselves or dedicate themselves to hard work receive the same benefits as those who chose the exact opposite. The equal distribution of rewards (ie money) across an entire population only ensures that everyone is equally poor except of course for the people at the top who are implementing and enforcing the system. The people marching for more economic equality have valid concerns but any real changes will probably effect their grand children more than it would help them. The extremists who support bringing the current system crashing down in total are taking the very real chance that the resulting chaos and anarchy will eclipse the level of suffering people are experiencing today by a long shot.
We have mousetrapped ourselves in the ever escalating cycle of security precautions. We complain about the inconveniences and then as soon as an attack happens we clamor for even more security measures. People just need to accept that life has risks and while you can try to mitigate the risks you are never going to succeed 100%. I also despise the word "terrorist" in describing the attacks or using it to label any particular group. They attacks can be more accurately described as organized murder. The vast majority of people in the US are not walking around terrified about anything except the economy. I have a feeling that those who are labeled as "terrorists" are the ones experiencing real terror in their daily lives. Walking around constantly scanning the sky looking for a Hellfire missile coming down on them probably results in a lot of sore necks.
I've visited China 3 times in the past 5 years and if you get outside of the major cities most of the people you see have not prospered as much as those in the big cities. I enjoyed all my visits to China but I still wonder how an elite class of millionaires and billionaires get created in a system publicly advertised as adhering to communist principles and focused at providing equality across the board for the average worker.
" stopping terrorist acts by searching people before boarding planes" When it comes to terrorist attacks the fear is not so much about the attack itself it is about who gets blamed for letting the attack succeed in the first place. We never blame the actual terrorists anymore we only blame those who didn't prevent the attack from succeeding. I have not heard of anyone filling lawsuits against Al-Qaeda or any of it's brethren. Instead the airlines get sued and any government official (local or national) any where in the vicinity gets hammered for incompetence.
Technically speaking China would probably have the highest number of users or potential users based on population. However, I don't think people making $2 an hour have obtaining a smart phone at the top of their got to have list.
The problem today is that MAD is no longer a sure thing. It was an effective means in keeping the 5 most powerful countries from initiating another WW2 type war. Hell the US and USSR were setup to destroy then entire planet several times over by pushing a few buttons. That potential holocaust was able to keep even the most rabid militarists on both sides firmly under control. However, the smaller countries seeking nuclear weapons today are degrading the effectiveness of the MAD theory. Countries like N. Korea, Iran, and Pakistan openly use non-state actors to project power in their regions. I can just picture some idiot in Iran, N. Korea, or Pakistan selling a nuke to it's proxies to use as they see fit. A nuclear device transported by ground to it's intended target area leaves no missile tracks to immediately identify who set it off. It wouldn't take long AFTER the detonation to figure out where the bomb was most likely manufactured but by that time an immediate reprisal would not be a foregone conclusion. Using non-state actors creates some wiggle room in the traditional MAD response.
"NSA's secret sub-sonic earthquake machine accidently hit Turkey instead of Iran" Thanks for the perfect example of conspiracy driven assertion. I really hope you are just joking about the secret earthquake machine.
The root of the problem is that teachers at 1-12 grade levels have always been terribly underpaid. If a society wants to produce educated people they should start at the very beginning of the educational process. The second crucial component is the students themselves. The students must accept responsibility for their choices. You can go through the best school systems in the world and still come out as an idiot.
Yeah I am going to put my trust in a group called "Anonymous" to help bring transparency to government and corporation activities. Most of the documents released have been rather less than earth shaking. And there is nothing stopping the counter intelligence agencies (government or corporate) from creating documents that when examined in depth turn up to be false. In other words it is easy raise the level of doubt in the information released. The Internet in general is not the harbinger of truth and justice it is the most effective tool ever devised for creating and managing dis-information to the masses. The great information age is creating an environment of nothing but distrust, conspiracy theories, and revisionist proclamations that are leading to nothing but confusion and anger.
"dictators couldn't go about their merry genocidal ways by making their actions legal in the country they ruled." The ICC does not have the means to enforce there judgment. The ICC can issue all the accusations and charges they want but unless they can arrest the dictator and bring him to court the dictator will be able to continue running his country any way he wants. Laws, both international and domestic, are meaningless without the ability to apply force when needed to enforce the law. I don't care about anti-US sentiments in Europe or any other place in the world. I visited 14 countries over the past 3 years and the only animosity I encountered was from a drunk in an English pub. For some reason he was determined to blame me for all the US actions. However, once I explained to him that I was not the guy in charge and nobody in the US government solicited my opinion prior to making their decisions he went away.
The ICC mandate is to prosecute criminal actions in other countries if the country where the alleged crime was committed doesn't prosecute it. However, if the country involved has investigated the accusations and decided not to prosecute the ICC can claim jurisdiction. A case such as this would effectively allow double jeopardy which is specifically prohibited in the US judicial system. Your "bully mentality" remark is nothing but the end result of the never ending propaganda effort that allows other countries to blame all of their problems on a 3rd party which usually means the US. Thankfully this trend is creating an bipartisan political support for the US to scale back it's international footprint and finally let others deal with their own problems for a change.
International Laws are nothing more than pieces of paper. Laws require the ability to enforce them which does not exist today. International Laws also require a country to relinquish their sovereignty which will never happen. International laws and organizations like the ICC are driven by politics not justice.
"but time and time again the courts are ruling that the fourth amendment doesn't protect people who use modern technology" Can you provide some examples of this. Remember the law enforcement agencies can and do commit actions that infringe on the rights defined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights but it is the Judicial Branch that enforces these rights. Evidence is ruled inadmissible in a lot of court cases. One of the main reasons the government created Guantanamo was because the evidence they had would not be admissible in the US court system. That fact does not mean the person is innocent it just means the evidentiary procedures are not clearly defined for non-US citizens and actions committed outside of the US. Do the rights in the US system apply to the entire world? Can certain offences fall under the the Geneva Conventions? And if the Geneva Conventions are invoked there are specific rules that can be harsh. Any combatant not wearing or displaying any ensignia to identify them as combatants can be summarily executed. That rule alone could apply to all of the non-state combatants captured on any battlefield. It seems to me that at a minimum the US probably should adhere to the legal requirements where the crime was committed but in countries like Afghanistan there are no formal rights for their citizens. The US system is far from perfect but it does provide an adversarial relationship between those who charge people of crimes and those who determine if the charges violated the defendants rights.
The government has always had the means to collect information on it's citizens. Tax Returns, real estate records, banking records, school registration records, public utility bills, telephone books, drivers licenses, and other information has always been available it just took longer to get it. Just like the limits and caveats included in the Freedom of Speech or Assembly the to Privacy does not translate to the right of total anonymity.
Evidently you never visited E. Germany before the wall came down or spent any time in Iran, Yemen, Syria, N. Korea, or any similar countries recently. Data mining is used by everyone not just the government. The most dangerous online groups are criminals looking to collect credit card and other information they can use in a criminal enterprise. Most of the people complaining today about privacy issues are the same morons posting their life history on Face book. If you chose to participate in today's online world don't be surprised when your information becomes public. And yes, the US government does have the ability to collect massive amounts of data being transmitted through the Internet and mobile device infrastructure but even with sophisticated mining algorithms they are limited in how much data they can truly process. If the government becomes interested in your online activities it is usually because someone has pointed them in your specific direction.
"It is (or should be) common knowledge that the three letter agencies (and a bunch you've never heard of) spy on Americans on an ongoing basis." So you are saying all this spying is common knowledge but your next statement proclaims "We can't find out just what they are doing because it is classified", well then how in the hell did it become common knowledge? Are you just making shit up to support your own paranoid fantasies? You re-enforce this pattern further by stating "we can't prove we were spied upon because it's classified". This type of circular reasoning is just one more example of people creating their own "facts" by cherry picking facts or statements out of context . believing anything a "leaker" claims to be true without question, and creating conspiracy theories to tie all of your unsupported nonsense together in an effort to validate your world view.
I also believe that the technology is not the only or even the most important deciding factor in military success. Right now the US is the only country able to project significant military power globally. (outside of ICBM's of course) This includes aircraft carriers, ground troops and assets, and all the supplies needed during war. Without effective logistic capabilities in major combat operations the technology comes in 2nd place. Some examples would include when China was really itching to take possession of Taiwan. It wasn't Taiwan's weapon technology preventing them from invading it was the fact that they did not have the capability to move the amount of ground troops and supplies that would have been needed after the initial artillery and missile attacks were over. They would have had to break out the "million man swim" battle plan to actually take the country. Germany needed civilian trains just to get their relatively small amount of troops to Afghanistan. The British needed to use civilian cruise ships during their war with Argentina to get their soldiers and supplies to the battle field.
If you paid your dues I would definitely start trying to get your money back because evidently you don't know what the hell you are talking about. There are just as many, if not more, "idiots" who use Linux or any other non-MS products swamping the help desks. If you are to stupid to face this simple fact you should probably find another line of work. And you might not be a complete hater but you certainly qualify as a complete moron.