The Army was directed in 2002 to focus its research on producing a reconnaissance helicopter rather than one that can attack as well as scout. The helicopter was intended to counter Soviet weapons. Less pork barrel spending. In case some of you didn't know there are about 25+ pork barrel pilotless attack vehicles "RPV's make the difference (from 1974 mind you)" Googled Uncle Sam info on RPV's. Now ask yourself this question, what's wrong with U2 bombers, but wait before you shoot back with some cliche "low flying aerodynamic hoodoo" post, then I up you one now and state, then what's wrong with taking (what Uncle Scam themselves call) - the winner of all RPV's - Predator and just adding some stronger firepower on it? They've use it to kill before, so it is proven:
Bad weather has prevented U.S. military officials from reaching a site near Zawar Kili, Afghanistan, where a Feb. 4 strike by a CIA Predator unmanned aerial vehicle reportedly killed several Al Qaeda leaders, Pentagon spokeswoman Torie Clarke told reporters here today.
Bah... you're right I guess, spend a couple of billion more. I'll read about it later
The more they understand the role society plays in terrorism, the better they'll be able to counteract it Firstly my two cents... You have Santa who controls the presents delivered around the world for millions of kids, and then... Osama who controls the world's terrorists? Give me a break.
You're forgetting that it would not be in the military's best interest to live in a Utopia because the world would not need armed forces. Aside from that, when it comes to the US military, put your filtered Americanized book down and learn the truth for once. If you look at the majority of conflicts in this world, you would know the US played a major role through clandestine actions. Take the cold war for example. The United States engaged Russia to implode. Certainly their researchers had to have known about the nuclear factor that would come out of it concerning a splinter of countries with nukes. It would be moronic to think the collapse of the Soviet Union would make their arms disappear. So what do we have now, nukes on the black market. Irrelevant here, but you should know the role of the MIC (mil. ind, complex) a bit better from an outside perspective before you believe that the army is doing this in order for all of us to sing "I'd like to teach the world to sing...".
The ambitious project aims to help the US Army plan future conflicts which are unlikely to involve set-piece battles and instead be smaller in scale. Translation, lets simulate different combat scenarios here, so we'll know how to fight/kill (INSERT YOUR TERM HERE), when the time is appropriate.
As if someone in any country couldn't throw on a proxy server and download crypto source. Oh wait they might have forms to fill out on a site. I started writing a document about this but got bored with it, so here is a briefer on crypto and government errata...
It's become so fundamental to the operations of these groups that bin Laden and other Muslim extremists are teaching it at their camps in Afghanistan and Sudan, they add.
How can the then director of the FBI get away with making statements like this without offering a shred of proof that, indeed shows, ANY terrorist organisation using crypto and or steg? It's boggling considering that again, most persons with a decent (note the word DECENT) amount of compsec knowledge, would know, or at least assume PGP would be the way to go in efforts to safeguard messages. 4096 bit keys? They're supposed to be unbreakable, yet those in office are convinced that terrorists are using encryption. So the government has broken it, or are lying.
Another puzzling thing to note, if encryption is being used, and the government can support their claims, someone in government must have the capability to crack encryption, and assuming "Muslim extremists in Afghanistan, Albania, Britain, Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Syria, the USA, the West Bank and Gaza and Yemen" are using crypto, some agency must have some ultra powerful quantum based grid computer up to crack anything in seconds.
Reasoning for me stating this is simple, many times these stories break, the government has quickly 'broken the code', 'broken the code', and 'broken the code', in just enough time for most media outlets to report an all inclusive -- from-arrest-to-code-breaking -- article in time for headline news. Perplexing? No. Moronic? Yes.
"There is a tendency out there to envision a stereotypical Muslim fighter standing with an AK-47 in barren Afghanistan," says Ben Venzke, director of special intelligence projects for iDEFENSE, a cyberintelligence and risk management company based in Fairfax, Va.
"But Hamas, Hezbollah and bin Laden's groups have very sophisticated, well-educated people. Their technical equipment is good, and they have the bright, young minds to operate them," he said.
iDefense happens to have government contracts so I would not trust their word on anything in this article, nor any input on the subject. Nothing personal to iDefense per-se but business is business, and iDefense will try to sway the issue to their favour, perhaps on hopes of spooking some business out of government.
I never finished it because I didn't have time to do so, but you should think twice about believing everything you hear.The document is here and keep in mind I never finished, since it was becoming too long and boring to sift through the BS.
Sadly PS2 inspectors never found those Playstations either... It's all this bureaucratic nonsense that forces these silly embargoes. Next up, no more cooking oil for Cuba
Iraq buys 4000 PlayStation 2s in world conquest bid
By: Tony Smith
Posted: 19/12/2000 at 16:24 GMT
Forget Jim Carrey - Saddam Hussein is the real Grinch who stole Christmas - at least according to one Web site. It claims the Iraqi dictator is buying up the world's supply - such as it is - of PlayStation 2 consoles to build military supercomputers.
According to a WorldNetDaily report, US customs, the FBI and military intelligence - a contradiction in terms if we ever heard one - are investigating shipments of Sony's next-generation games machine to Baghdad. Some 4000 consoles have made their way to Iraq, those agencies reckon.
And that, says the report, is depriving American kiddies of their requested Christmas prezzies, poor dears.
It's hard to know what's worse: children engaging in (virtual) acts of mindless violence or the Republican Guard sharpening its skills on Tekken Tournament.
It is clear from the articles in the Royal Charter, that the BBC is entirely responsible for setting its own standards for broadcasting, which it does in the "Producers Guidelines". In addition, the BBC is also responsible for dealing with complaints about its programmes through its own in-house procedures. This is a totally unsatisfactory situation, as the BBC is setting the standards and is then the judge and jury on complaints about non-compliance with its own procedures and standards.
There is ample evidence to show that the BBC is very unwilling to accept any complaints about its programmes. This applies to complaints from individuals about specific programmes or even complaints about a whole series of programmes resulting from years of very detailed research. This is evident from the work carried out by Minotaur Media Tracking Ltd., an independent research organisation, which was reported in David Keighley's paper to the BBC Bias Conference. Alistair Campbell, the PM's Director of Communications, is also quoted as telling MP's
Since you pointed it out with your BBCBias farce, read it very carefully. What I see are people whining - and take a look and KNOW WTF and who TF is complaining mainly (The Daily Telegraph) about the BBC. So you think it is a good thing to have government DICTATE, wait let me out this in your terminology, narrate, what BBC posts. Are you kidding? Maybe you should switch to Psyop central CNN. Read it clearly The BBC is financed by a TV licence paid by households. It does not have to serve the interests of advertisers, or produce a return for shareholders. They stand nothing to gain.
Let me ask you something, and I doubt you'll give the correct answer, Al Jazeera, this is what? Media jihad machine for terrorists? Hell many would disprove this, what about Guerilla News? I'm not talking IndyMedia here where any hoohaa can post whatever they want now. Wait, since you point out your BBCBias site. Israel has now 'banned the BBC' by withdrawing cooperation for Visas and individuals for comment after many months of consistently biased pro-Palestinian reporting So let me get this straight, because Israelis are upset that the Palestinian side of the news is being showed... Oh wait what was I thinking. You're right damn you BBC for being biased and pointing out the other side of the story. You my friend made me a believer, a true right wingist! Thank you
you're gonna hurt someone's feelings and they'll call you a liberal because they have nothing fruitful to add. Same people probably think USC in court means University of South Carolina. I pity the retaliation they'll post to you. And I'm glad you didn't post anything on how Ashcroft seeks to have all charges for everyone being charged with a crime maxed out for (yeehaw!) terrorist observation.
You can thank them for your liberties being bled from you.
Mark Maybury, MITRE (Chair), maybury@mitre.org
Karen Sparck Jones, University of Cambridge, sparckjones@cl.cam.ac.uk
Ellen Voorhees, NIST, ellen.voorhees@nist.gov
Sanda Harabagiu, University of Texas at Austin, sanda@cs.utexas.edu
Liz Liddy, University of Syracuse, liddy@syr.edu
John Prange, ARDA, jprange@nsa.gov
ARDA workshops. And for your non Americans, if you think it's limited to us... Have I got news for you! They'll be snooping around the mountains when you come... They'll be snooping around the mountains... they'll be snooping around the mountains...
See what acronyms can do to you. MWEAC, OSIS, MISSI, hell some of their own don't even know what exists or even what they do. Again, I thank John Asscroft and his Patriot Act, all under the gimmick of the pork barrel Department of Homeland Insignificance. Now, obviously this sound trollish but it is not, most people here click by things without looking into things. Sort of like the way stories are read here, a quick glimpse, and that's that.
For those interested in what is going on in government behind the scenes, don't always think people who post the kinds of things I post are all conspiratorial stories aimed at bringing down government through chaos. Hell look at sites like FAS, Cryptome, Arms Control, and the multitude of others. Many people point things out but too many are concerned with menial things such as Janet's boobs, Sex and the Shitty, etc., to notice the rug being pulled from under them. Hell most Americans think CNN and Fox are the holy grail of news. Get out there and read, know what's happening in your country. Check out BBC, Observer, Greg Palast, AntiWar, Chomsky. These people aren't being controlled via advertisers, not political pressure. I write sometimes too kooky assed documents, that some might say aren't worth a pot to piss in. Maybe so, but there is a reason for me rambling on like a madman sometimes. I care about my privacy and liberty. I don't want my friends or family growing up in something out of "Escape from Alcatraz"
20lb versus 20kg, I wasn't trying to point out a fud based document, more like making a statement about the current state of affairs concerning ^terror*. Now, just to amuse everyone a bit more, assuming someone used one of these rc's for an aerial dusting, how much damage do you think 1lb of anthrax could do? 30 minutes, scratch that. What about 2 minutes with 1 pound of anthrax, say over a sports event? Irrelevant, it's a toy, and I was pseudo trolling about the (again) the "everything must be al Qaeda" state of news running around in the world today. Maybe someone will get a clue to what's real and what is media && big bro fabrication. It was supposed to make you shake your head and laugh it off, so get a "grep" on yourself you worry to much, forget what you just read everything is fine
Don't shoot the messenger... I could see it now "They have Dragonflyers and weapons of mass destruction. We have to ban all RC toys due to al Qaeda this christmas"
A Remote Threat
This past June, quoting a German intelligence official, the Reuters news agency reported that al Qaeda might be planning to attack passenger aircraft using model airplanes. Some have dismissed this threat as unlikely or fanciful, but other terrorism experts foresee terrorist groups' using remote-control planes, boats, helicopters, and other delivery devices to attack people and sites without sacrificing any of their members.
Is the time ripe for such attacks? With the Western world hardening its defenses after 9-11, terrorists will be looking for creative ways to get past security, says Louis R. Mizell, a private security expert and ex-U.S. intelligence officer.
Mizell, who gathers data on security and terrorist incidents, says precedent for such attacks exists. He has recorded 43 cases involving 14 terrorist groups in which remote-control delivery systems were "either threatened, developed, or actually utilized." Only last year it was reported, for example, that Osama bin Laden considered using remote-control airplanes packed with explosives to kill President George W. Bush and other heads of state at the G-8 summit in Genoa, Italy. In 1995, reports indicated that Aum Shinrikyo, the Japanese terrorist group that attacked the Tokyo subway with sarin gas, planned to use remote-control helicopters to spray dangerous chemicals from the air. The helicopters crashed during testing. In the 1980s, the Basque separatist group ETA tried to blow up a Spanish patrol ship using a four-foot remote-control boat packed with explosives.
The U.S. military is devoting considerable resources to its own remote-control delivery systems. For example, engineers are working on enhancing pilotless "drones" to make them effective means of attack without putting a flight crew at risk.
Critics have downplayed this threat because of the relatively small payloads that such devices can deliver. But some remote-control devices on the market can hold large amounts of explosives. A Mississippi company called Bergen R/C Helicopters, for example, advertises over the Internet a five-foot-long remote-control helicopter, costing $4,000, that can carry a 20 kg (44 lb) payload for 30 minutes without needing to refuel. Yamaha Motor Co. markets over the Internet a remote-control helicopter with a 20 kg payload as a pilotless crop duster. And, Mizell points out, terrorists could use many vehicles with smaller payloads en masse to create the same effect.
Other experts agree that the threat is legitimate. "Do you want to know if this is a real threat?" asks Gary Richter, a systems analyst at Sandia National Laboratories who evaluates the goals and capabilities of terrorist groups. "The answer is an unequivocal yes."
Robert Blitzer, a former chief of the Domestic Terrorism/Counterterrorism Planning Section in the FBI's National Security Division, said he hadn't personally encountered that threat while with the FBI but conceded that it was viable. "I wouldn't be at all surprised that al Qaeda would have the wherewithal to do something like that," Blitzer says.
"Remote-control vehicles of various sorts do have to be considered," agrees RAND analyst Brian Jenkins, "but they have a limited spectrum in terms of utility." He points out that remote-control bombs "would barely dent a skyscraper" and wouldn't compromise the dome of a nuclear reactor. Jenkins adds that remote-control delivery devices would be unnecessary in situations where terrorists could simply plant a bomb and walk away--in Times Square, for example.
But Mizell sees a much broader scope of potential applications, such as boat attacks on maritime vessels and littoral utilities, as well as plane, helicopter, or car attacks on targeted VIPs' vehicles. "Real-life analogous situations show us what could be done," he says. For example, in 1998, a radio-control model airplane forced the pilot of a DC-9 to change his approach to Dulles International Airport.
Literally I puke it up nowadaysIt goes on to allege that SCO "made a false or misleading representation... in that... when [it] granted licences over Linux in the past it wrongly stated the scope of rights granted under the licence." All jokes aside it's this asinine, counterproductive stance that SCO has taken, which has led to even more asinine counterproductive gestapoish legislation. When will SCO and other corporations learn they hurt no one but themselves.
Umm, surveillance isn't necessarily illegal. Of course not, but when you're using ECHELON for profit where do you draw the line? It's nothing new for countries to spy on each other, it's why diplomats are often kicked out of countries for so called 'parking violations', everyone in the intel community knows that. I've read numerous documents on intelligence, and many top ranking officials sum it up as playing chess with your enemy one minute (literally playing chess), the getting back to work to an extent.
On a strictly legal basis, the legality of the war isn't clear. If you're to use the excuse, "to prevent an illegal act" you should be pretty sure it is actually illegal. We wouldn't want to use/. as a forum for this, so let's leave it at what I'm inferring from you, that no one pushed an illegal war. Everyone did all that was possible, and looked at all the ties.
Like many others engaged in civil disobedience. They choose to defy what they think is a bad law by breaking it. In and of itself, civil disobedience doesn't mean you're right. I can gather from your post you know your history, so why didn't it sink in that the world revolutionizes itself via some form of disobedience, whether via anarchy, or civil war. I applaud Ms. Gun (not to leave out she's cute) for coming clean on what she believed in. I argue points politically everyday, and say/do what I believe is right, what morally feels right. Before I say something/post something on my site I think it through thoroughly and add IN YOUR FACE headlines to grab attention. Am I wrong for fighting/saying what's on my mind? For instance I threw together two interesting cases (Downed spy plane) on my about page concerning a situation, with an explanation of my site. I really try to look at things from both sides, hell go through some of my -1 posts and you would swear I worked at MS even though I use solaris. Mrs. Gun acted on her intuition on what she viewed as an illegal act, and you know what, as the s**t is now hitting the fan, what's happening is a media scrub-down, anyone with common sense can see this.
I'm sure that members of the KKK think what they are doing is the right thing to do. Ever occur to you that the majority of klansters are groomed into this? There is a difference here. They're conditioned to be that way (read classical conditioning on any psychology based site) so you're comparing apples and oranges.
It's a PC user's nightmare: You're almost done with a lengthy e-mail, or about to finish a report at the office, and the computer crashes for no apparent reason. It tries to restart but never quite finishes booting. Then it crashes again. And again.
Getting caught in such a loop is frustrating enough on Earth. But imagine what it's like when the computer is 200 million miles away on Mars. That's what mission controllers faced when the Mars rover Spirit stopped communicating last month.
...
Tech support for an $820 million mission is a cautious affair. Tools to recover from and fix any problem must be built into the system before launch. The systems' behaviors need to be completely understood and predictable.
"Luckily, during the design period, we anticipated that we might get into a situation like this," said Glenn Reeves, who oversees the software aboard the Mars rovers Sprit and Opportunity at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
For stability, reliability and predictability, mission designers did not bust the budget and design the hardware or software from scratch. Instead, they turned to hardware and software that's been used in space before and has a proven track record on Earth as well.
"The advantage of using commercial software is it's well-known, and it's well deployed," said Mike Deliman, an engineer at Alameda-based Wind River Systems Inc., which made the rovers' operating system. "It has been used throughout the world in hundreds of thousands of applications."
The operating system, VxWorks, has its roots in software developed to help Francis Ford Coppola gain more control over a film editing system. But the developers, David Wilner and Jerry Fiddler, saw a greater potential and eventually formed Wind River, named for the mountains in Wyoming. VxWorks became a formal product in 1987.
Companies should be legally required to disclose vulnerabilities to government Uhh that's what security lists are for. Just look at the recent securityfocus rantings about MS taking 6 months for a patch, because the vuln was in development. So what can you really blame MS when, sure they did disclose it when their engineers pinpointed it. That would be unfair to any vendor. Just look at private exploits, what would you say about that?
It should also be made available via the Freedom of Information Act because we have a right to know that our information is being protected. Good luck. Hell if non top-secret energy documents are kept from the public, you should know that they'll throw a "We're protecting the infrastructure from terrorists... Even mother nature (sorry I can't get over the mother nature humor)
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- When individual Americans are accused of helping terrorists, they're thrown in jail and their names are dragged through the mud.
But when major U.S. corporations are caught trading with the enemy, they get just a slap on the wrist from the government.
In the past two weeks, the government has revealed that 57 companies and organizations have been fined for doing business with terrorists, despots and tyrants.
...
Each year, the government investigates thousands of cases of U.S. individuals or companies for alleged violations of the Trading with the Enemy Act and other statutes and executive orders that restrict free trade. Each year, the government imposes millions of dollars in civil penalties and prosecutes 10 or so criminal cases.
We know why the companies are silent about what they've done. No one wants to be associated in the public mind with torturers, thugs and murderers, even if it's profitable to be associated with them in private. The companies' explanations, when available, show that even the most enthusiastic supporter of sanctions can run afoul of the law through no malice on their part.
not necessarily true. Sure lawyers may be the scum of the earth in some eyes, but without them who do you think would have your back if you were seriously injured, if your family fell ill to something. Do you think big bro would sympathetically pay your hospital bills, etc.?. So love em or hate em, lawyers serve as an equalizer to some degree.
to submit details about their physical and cyber vulnerabilities to a newly-formed office within the Department of Homeland Security, with legally-binding assurances that the information will not be used against them or released to the public.
Geez I feel safe already. It's not like any teenager could break into a gov website or anything. Makes me warm and fuzzy inside. And in more "E"lated news... The US government announces the greatest terrorist to walk the planet... Mother Nature, and her Weather of Mass Destruction
They're caught up with too many pork barrel projects to focus solely on the shuttle. Mission to Mars, GTE.
What if the National Science Foundation got to directly and substantially compete with NASA, though? (As other examples there are also the Department of Defense (such as the Air Force or DARPA); the FAAs AST; and the NIH, etcetera.) The National Science Foundation has no research facilities of its own, and it conditions grant-awards on successful completion of a peer review process involving experts from academia, industry and the government. If the National Science Foundation (for example) got more funding allocated for its space endeavors along with the authorization to directly compete against NASA, it could utilize NASA centers as long as doing so withstands peer review scrutiny. This could boost NASA's public image, as people would be more likely to believe that whatever remains of NASA is not merely a product of executive or legislative pork-barreling, stacked evaluation boards, and bureaucratic inertia.
NASA's $13.6 billion annual budget dwarfs the $170 million budget for the National Science Foundation's space-related projects (which are presently focused merely on ground-based astronomy). The NSF therefore has to reject close to 75% of the space-related research proposals it receives. The Congressional Appropriations subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies decides how much money it will allocate to both NASA and the National Science Foundation. Why not boost the NSF's space budget and, more significantly, broaden the scope of space activities for which future NSF money is earmarked? The NSF could already compete regarding funding nanotechnology research, space plasma investigations (related to nuclear fusion, for example), and microgravity studies. Does it really make sense to maintain the presently large budget discrepancy? source)
Don't be fooled by a wolf in sheeps clothing. Rather crackedout Buzz Lightyear in a NASA digital editing room.
Ok so I don't object. Depending upon the site, these companies better come up with something that no one else can before I subscribe to them. Simple news? Oh no I can get it for free from so many other sources. Now considering sites like Washington Post, and Guardian allow other sites to mirror their content, why would I pay for the Washpost, if I could find a free site posting their very own content?
Again not to be too critical, but it's the same with newspapers if you think about it. Should I buy today's New York Times? Hell no, I could go into the conference room, or get my co-workers' copy. Good luck to the news sites for trying to come up with a plan, it will work to some extent, but they'd be losing a hell of a lot of viewers to some extent as well.
Funny no one in Vegas thought about some EMP/HERF type scenario. Would answer a lot, then again it wouldn't because it would mean electrical failures for all. Could have been a frequency tampering gizmo since car alarms seem to be affected, would be similar to say a phone jammer.
Slashdot Mirror
wget -qO - http://www.mixpills.com/|sed -n '4p'|awk '{print $6,$7,$8}'|mail `whoami`
or...
lynx -dump http://www.mixpills.com/|sed -n '45p'
4275742e2e2e2063616e206974206361746368746869732121 21
The Army was directed in 2002 to focus its research on producing a reconnaissance helicopter rather than one that can attack as well as scout. The helicopter was intended to counter Soviet weapons. Less pork barrel spending. In case some of you didn't know there are about 25+ pork barrel pilotless attack vehicles "RPV's make the difference (from 1974 mind you)" Googled Uncle Sam info on RPV's. Now ask yourself this question, what's wrong with U2 bombers, but wait before you shoot back with some cliche "low flying aerodynamic hoodoo" post, then I up you one now and state, then what's wrong with taking (what Uncle Scam themselves call) - the winner of all RPV's - Predator and just adding some stronger firepower on it? They've use it to kill before, so it is proven:Bah... you're right I guess, spend a couple of billion more. I'll read about it later
The more they understand the role society plays in terrorism, the better they'll be able to counteract it Firstly my two cents... You have Santa who controls the presents delivered around the world for millions of kids, and then
You're forgetting that it would not be in the military's best interest to live in a Utopia because the world would not need armed forces. Aside from that, when it comes to the US military, put your filtered Americanized book down and learn the truth for once. If you look at the majority of conflicts in this world, you would know the US played a major role through clandestine actions. Take the cold war for example. The United States engaged Russia to implode. Certainly their researchers had to have known about the nuclear factor that would come out of it concerning a splinter of countries with nukes. It would be moronic to think the collapse of the Soviet Union would make their arms disappear. So what do we have now, nukes on the black market. Irrelevant here, but you should know the role of the MIC (mil. ind, complex) a bit better from an outside perspective before you believe that the army is doing this in order for all of us to sing "I'd like to teach the world to sing...".
The ambitious project aims to help the US Army plan future conflicts which are unlikely to involve set-piece battles and instead be smaller in scale. Translation, lets simulate different combat scenarios here, so we'll know how to fight/kill (INSERT YOUR TERM HERE), when the time is appropriate.
Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
The Observer
- Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
- Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
- Threat to the world is greater than terrorism
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.
rest of article
As if someone in any country couldn't throw on a proxy server and download crypto source. Oh wait they might have forms to fill out on a site. I started writing a document about this but got bored with it, so here is a briefer on crypto and government errata... I never finished it because I didn't have time to do so, but you should think twice about believing everything you hear.The document is here and keep in mind I never finished, since it was becoming too long and boring to sift through the BS.
"Hi Amir my name is hot4u, and I am so hot. Please get back to me.
Sadly PS2 inspectors never found those Playstations either... It's all this bureaucratic nonsense that forces these silly embargoes. Next up, no more cooking oil for Cuba
There is ample evidence to show that the BBC is very unwilling to accept any complaints about its programmes. This applies to complaints from individuals about specific programmes or even complaints about a whole series of programmes resulting from years of very detailed research. This is evident from the work carried out by Minotaur Media Tracking Ltd., an independent research organisation, which was reported in David Keighley's paper to the BBC Bias Conference. Alistair Campbell, the PM's Director of Communications, is also quoted as telling MP's
Since you pointed it out with your BBCBias farce, read it very carefully. What I see are people whining - and take a look and KNOW WTF and who TF is complaining mainly (The Daily Telegraph) about the BBC. So you think it is a good thing to have government DICTATE, wait let me out this in your terminology, narrate, what BBC posts. Are you kidding? Maybe you should switch to Psyop central CNN. Read it clearly The BBC is financed by a TV licence paid by households. It does not have to serve the interests of advertisers, or produce a return for shareholders. They stand nothing to gain.
Let me ask you something, and I doubt you'll give the correct answer, Al Jazeera, this is what? Media jihad machine for terrorists? Hell many would disprove this, what about Guerilla News? I'm not talking IndyMedia here where any hoohaa can post whatever they want now. Wait, since you point out your BBCBias site. Israel has now 'banned the BBC' by withdrawing cooperation for Visas and individuals for comment after many months of consistently biased pro-Palestinian reporting So let me get this straight, because Israelis are upset that the Palestinian side of the news is being showed... Oh wait what was I thinking. You're right damn you BBC for being biased and pointing out the other side of the story. You my friend made me a believer, a true right wingist! Thank you
you're gonna hurt someone's feelings and they'll call you a liberal because they have nothing fruitful to add. Same people probably think USC in court means University of South Carolina. I pity the retaliation they'll post to you. And I'm glad you didn't post anything on how Ashcroft seeks to have all charges for everyone being charged with a crime maxed out for (yeehaw!) terrorist observation.
Mark Maybury, MITRE (Chair), maybury@mitre.org
Karen Sparck Jones, University of Cambridge, sparckjones@cl.cam.ac.uk
Ellen Voorhees, NIST, ellen.voorhees@nist.gov
Sanda Harabagiu, University of Texas at Austin, sanda@cs.utexas.edu
Liz Liddy, University of Syracuse, liddy@syr.edu
John Prange, ARDA, jprange@nsa.gov
ARDA workshops. And for your non Americans, if you think it's limited to us... Have I got news for you! They'll be snooping around the mountains when you come... They'll be snooping around the mountains... they'll be snooping around the mountains...
See what acronyms can do to you. MWEAC, OSIS, MISSI, hell some of their own don't even know what exists or even what they do. Again, I thank John Asscroft and his Patriot Act, all under the gimmick of the pork barrel Department of Homeland Insignificance. Now, obviously this sound trollish but it is not, most people here click by things without looking into things. Sort of like the way stories are read here, a quick glimpse, and that's that.
For those interested in what is going on in government behind the scenes, don't always think people who post the kinds of things I post are all conspiratorial stories aimed at bringing down government through chaos. Hell look at sites like FAS, Cryptome, Arms Control, and the multitude of others. Many people point things out but too many are concerned with menial things such as Janet's boobs, Sex and the Shitty, etc., to notice the rug being pulled from under them. Hell most Americans think CNN and Fox are the holy grail of news. Get out there and read, know what's happening in your country. Check out BBC, Observer, Greg Palast, AntiWar, Chomsky. These people aren't being controlled via advertisers, not political pressure. I write sometimes too kooky assed documents, that some might say aren't worth a pot to piss in. Maybe so, but there is a reason for me rambling on like a madman sometimes. I care about my privacy and liberty. I don't want my friends or family growing up in something out of "Escape from Alcatraz"
20lb versus 20kg, I wasn't trying to point out a fud based document, more like making a statement about the current state of affairs concerning ^terror*. Now, just to amuse everyone a bit more, assuming someone used one of these rc's for an aerial dusting, how much damage do you think 1lb of anthrax could do? 30 minutes, scratch that. What about 2 minutes with 1 pound of anthrax, say over a sports event? Irrelevant, it's a toy, and I was pseudo trolling about the (again) the "everything must be al Qaeda" state of news running around in the world today. Maybe someone will get a clue to what's real and what is media && big bro fabrication. It was supposed to make you shake your head and laugh it off, so get a "grep" on yourself you worry to much, forget what you just read everything is fine
A Remote Threat
This past June, quoting a German intelligence official, the Reuters news agency reported that al Qaeda might be planning to attack passenger aircraft using model airplanes. Some have dismissed this threat as unlikely or fanciful, but other terrorism experts foresee terrorist groups' using remote-control planes, boats, helicopters, and other delivery devices to attack people and sites without sacrificing any of their members.
Is the time ripe for such attacks? With the Western world hardening its defenses after 9-11, terrorists will be looking for creative ways to get past security, says Louis R. Mizell, a private security expert and ex-U.S. intelligence officer.
Mizell, who gathers data on security and terrorist incidents, says precedent for such attacks exists. He has recorded 43 cases involving 14 terrorist groups in which remote-control delivery systems were "either threatened, developed, or actually utilized." Only last year it was reported, for example, that Osama bin Laden considered using remote-control airplanes packed with explosives to kill President George W. Bush and other heads of state at the G-8 summit in Genoa, Italy. In 1995, reports indicated that Aum Shinrikyo, the Japanese terrorist group that attacked the Tokyo subway with sarin gas, planned to use remote-control helicopters to spray dangerous chemicals from the air. The helicopters crashed during testing. In the 1980s, the Basque separatist group ETA tried to blow up a Spanish patrol ship using a four-foot remote-control boat packed with explosives.
The U.S. military is devoting considerable resources to its own remote-control delivery systems. For example, engineers are working on enhancing pilotless "drones" to make them effective means of attack without putting a flight crew at risk.
Critics have downplayed this threat because of the relatively small payloads that such devices can deliver. But some remote-control devices on the market can hold large amounts of explosives. A Mississippi company called Bergen R/C Helicopters, for example, advertises over the Internet a five-foot-long remote-control helicopter, costing $4,000, that can carry a 20 kg (44 lb) payload for 30 minutes without needing to refuel. Yamaha Motor Co. markets over the Internet a remote-control helicopter with a 20 kg payload as a pilotless crop duster. And, Mizell points out, terrorists could use many vehicles with smaller payloads en masse to create the same effect.
Other experts agree that the threat is legitimate. "Do you want to know if this is a real threat?" asks Gary Richter, a systems analyst at Sandia National Laboratories who evaluates the goals and capabilities of terrorist groups. "The answer is an unequivocal yes."
Robert Blitzer, a former chief of the Domestic Terrorism/Counterterrorism Planning Section in the FBI's National Security Division, said he hadn't personally encountered that threat while with the FBI but conceded that it was viable. "I wouldn't be at all surprised that al Qaeda would have the wherewithal to do something like that," Blitzer says.
"Remote-control vehicles of various sorts do have to be considered," agrees RAND analyst Brian Jenkins, "but they have a limited spectrum in terms of utility." He points out that remote-control bombs "would barely dent a skyscraper" and wouldn't compromise the dome of a nuclear reactor. Jenkins adds that remote-control delivery devices would be unnecessary in situations where terrorists could simply plant a bomb and walk away--in Times Square, for example.
But Mizell sees a much broader scope of potential applications, such as boat attacks on maritime vessels and littoral utilities, as well as plane, helicopter, or car attacks on targeted VIPs' vehicles. "Real-life analogous situations show us what could be done," he says. For example, in 1998, a radio-control model airplane forced the pilot of a DC-9 to change his approach to Dulles International Airport.
source
Literally I puke it up nowadays It goes on to allege that SCO "made a false or misleading representation
And so ... I troll no more
Umm, surveillance isn't necessarily illegal. Of course not, but when you're using ECHELON for profit where do you draw the line? It's nothing new for countries to spy on each other, it's why diplomats are often kicked out of countries for so called 'parking violations', everyone in the intel community knows that. I've read numerous documents on intelligence, and many top ranking officials sum it up as playing chess with your enemy one minute (literally playing chess), the getting back to work to an extent.
On a strictly legal basis, the legality of the war isn't clear. If you're to use the excuse, "to prevent an illegal act" you should be pretty sure it is actually illegal. We wouldn't want to use /. as a forum for this, so let's leave it at what I'm inferring from you, that no one pushed an illegal war. Everyone did all that was possible, and looked at all the ties.
Like many others engaged in civil disobedience. They choose to defy what they think is a bad law by breaking it. In and of itself, civil disobedience doesn't mean you're right. I can gather from your post you know your history, so why didn't it sink in that the world revolutionizes itself via some form of disobedience, whether via anarchy, or civil war. I applaud Ms. Gun (not to leave out she's cute) for coming clean on what she believed in. I argue points politically everyday, and say/do what I believe is right, what morally feels right. Before I say something/post something on my site I think it through thoroughly and add IN YOUR FACE headlines to grab attention. Am I wrong for fighting/saying what's on my mind? For instance I threw together two interesting cases (Downed spy plane) on my about page concerning a situation, with an explanation of my site. I really try to look at things from both sides, hell go through some of my -1 posts and you would swear I worked at MS even though I use solaris. Mrs. Gun acted on her intuition on what she viewed as an illegal act, and you know what, as the s**t is now hitting the fan, what's happening is a media scrub-down, anyone with common sense can see this.
I'm sure that members of the KKK think what they are doing is the right thing to do. Ever occur to you that the majority of klansters are groomed into this? There is a difference here. They're conditioned to be that way (read classical conditioning on any psychology based site) so you're comparing apples and oranges.
Companies should be legally required to disclose vulnerabilities to government Uhh that's what security lists are for. Just look at the recent securityfocus rantings about MS taking 6 months for a patch, because the vuln was in development. So what can you really blame MS when, sure they did disclose it when their engineers pinpointed it. That would be unfair to any vendor. Just look at private exploits, what would you say about that?
It should also be made available via the Freedom of Information Act because we have a right to know that our information is being protected. Good luck. Hell if non top-secret energy documents are kept from the public, you should know that they'll throw a "We're protecting the infrastructure from terrorists... Even mother nature (sorry I can't get over the mother nature humor)
not necessarily true. Sure lawyers may be the scum of the earth in some eyes, but without them who do you think would have your back if you were seriously injured, if your family fell ill to something. Do you think big bro would sympathetically pay your hospital bills, etc.?. So love em or hate em, lawyers serve as an equalizer to some degree.
Geez I feel safe already. It's not like any teenager could break into a gov website or anything. Makes me warm and fuzzy inside. And in more "E"lated news... The US government announces the greatest terrorist to walk the planet... Mother Nature, and her Weather of Mass Destruction
Ok so I don't object. Depending upon the site, these companies better come up with something that no one else can before I subscribe to them. Simple news? Oh no I can get it for free from so many other sources. Now considering sites like Washington Post, and Guardian allow other sites to mirror their content, why would I pay for the Washpost, if I could find a free site posting their very own content?
Again not to be too critical, but it's the same with newspapers if you think about it. Should I buy today's New York Times? Hell no, I could go into the conference room, or get my co-workers' copy. Good luck to the news sites for trying to come up with a plan, it will work to some extent, but they'd be losing a hell of a lot of viewers to some extent as well.
Funny no one in Vegas thought about some EMP/HERF type scenario. Would answer a lot, then again it wouldn't because it would mean electrical failures for all. Could have been a frequency tampering gizmo since car alarms seem to be affected, would be similar to say a phone jammer.
[scrptk1d] d00d!*!~
[scrptk1d] i jUsT sNifFeD pArIs HiLtOn's WeBpHoNe Cam!
[p1mp] y0 y0 y0 post dat shit on that net!&^
[scrptk1d] w3rd!~!~!