Posts

Showing posts with the label social engineering

The Rule of Law

GLENN GREENWALD: ... Let’s just quickly describe in the most dispassionate terms, as few of euphemisms, as possible, where we are and what has happened over the last eight years. We have a law in place that says it is a felony offense punishable by five years in prison or a $10,000 fine to eavesdrop on American citizens without warrants. We have laws in place that say that it is a felony punishable by decades in prison to subject detainees in our custody to treatment that violates the Geneva Conventions or that is inhumane or coercive. We know that the president and his top aides have violated these laws. The facts are indisputable that they’ve done so. And yet as a country, as a political class, we’re deciding basically in unison that the president and our highest political officials are free to break the most serious laws that we have, that our citizens have enacted, with complete impunity, without consequences, without being held accountable under the law. And when you juxtapose t...

Press Blackouts

What happens when mainstream media starts taking an even more active role in shaping public opinion; moving beyond spin and actually changing or omitting critical information? It's really fascinating how Fox, ABC, NBC, CNN, NYTimes and others have been blacking out Ron Paul's campaign. Even going so far as ABC and CNN actually misreporting results in the Nevada primaries. And what have you heard in the "conventional" media about the S 1959 Thought Crime bill making its way through senate? This one targets "american terrorists." With the removal of habeas corpus (didn't hear about that one? That's odd eh? It just means the government can put you in jail without a charge and without evidence. Indefinitely) and this bill proposing the use of paramilitary agencies like blackwater against US citizens with dissident views (not necessarily actions.) The so called "patriot act" has set aside 7 of the first ten amendments. I think some of our ...

Falsifying News

Isn't exactly against the law. The motive for profit, especially in spinning the "truth", is probably more dangerous than any (other) ideology. One more reason why Fox News sucks.

End of Democracy

Courtesy of Gerbeans, here's a video of the lecture for all who didn't have time to finish the book I brought down :-)

Fear and Individual Freedom

This is a fascinating documentary, showing some amazing historical threads that most people are unaware of behind our most recent conflicts of ideologies with the middle east and with the erosion of individual freedom in america. It's not a conspiracy film and it is solidly grounded. Highly recommended (a bit long though, but it keeps you riveted if you set away some time to learn about this. It *will* make you think and will give you some facts that 98% of the people with strong opinions on these issues have no clue about.) Part 2 is here , for you over-achievers.

The Blueprint

Fascinating stuff. Colbert is great at employing a little known strategy of Nietzsche's I've always admired for it's subtlety. Not that Colbert is all that subtle. But the strategy states that the best way to argue against something, is to argue for it. Poorly. Something Colbert does with humor and O'Reilly does without a clue. But I'm curious about the 10 steps now, guess I'll have to make another run to bookstore. Man how I hate that ;-)

Big Lies

A military statesman once said, big lies are more believable than small ones (Hitler.) Which got me thinking about a certain claim by a certain cell-phone company that they have "the fewest dropped calls of any carrier." Now Ger-beans is probably not a good test case, or maybe he is, but just about every conversation with him and said carrier involves a dropped call at least once during the conversation. So I got curious about how one substantiates the "fewest dropped calls claim." Especially since cell phone outage statistics are private. Can't have them terrorists knowing which carrier they should use, after all. On their site, the only reference the carrier makes to the research is "based on nationwide experience among national wireless carriers." Nothing about how many in the sample, how the research was conducted or by whom. Other carriers tout that they, in fact, are the "most reliable" or the "highest ranking in customer satisfac...