USA Politics

Forostar said:
Some people do a lot to defend the right of weapon possession I am afraid.
Click to expand...
While I disagree with Travis' idea of that sort of protest, I don't see this as an issue of weapon possession. I think schools are way too cautious with this sort of thing, just the mere mention of a gun sets them off. There are better signs of kids who are mentally unstable and need attention than talking about guns. There are also better ways to handle it than giving them an 'F' or suspending them.

I pretended to play Star Wars and had Duck Hunt on Nintendo when I was in elementary school and it didn't harm me mentally. Like Perun, my parents just told me that shooting people isn't OK and war is not fun and games.
 
... and it continues
http://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html
The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post.

The program, code-named PRISM, has not been made public until now. It may be the first of its kind. The NSA prides itself on stealing secrets and breaking codes, and it is accustomed to corporate partnerships that help it divert data traffic or sidestep barriers. But there has never been a Google or Facebook before, and it is unlikely that there are richer troves of valuable intelligence than the ones in Silicon Valley.

Equally unusual is the way the NSA extracts what it wants, according to the document: “Collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.”
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, similar .. but probably easier now with communication via the internet more centalized. From a techie standpoint, this really interests me. This is pretty much what I do for a living (not for the government, but for a US retailer) ... it is interesting how you can collect data from a variety of sources and between a column store database/hadooop take billions and billions of pieces of random data and detect patterns very quickly. I give where I work credit for making a stance that we would use data in an ethical manner .. unlike the government I am guessing.

.. and we are doing this on the reasonably cheap compared to what the NSA can afford in hardware, man power, and software.

It is cool, useful, and scary as hell for me all at the same time.
 
Saddam Hussein’s Right-Hand Man Now Works For Obama?
From: http://www.westernjournalism.com/saddan-husseins-right-hand-man-now-works-for-obama/
Many of you may recall Saddam Hussein’s mouthpiece, Baghdad Bob. He was known for his colorful personality and grossly over-the-top, idealistic propaganda.

He’d glorify the invincibility of the Iraqi Army and celebrate the eternalness of Saddam’s rule. His broadcasts tried to fuel a cult-like public following that was totally controlled by state censorship.

But in the early 2000s, the internet gave the world a glimpse of what dictatorial reign looked like. And Baghdad Bob became a laughing stock in the Western world, mostly because his lies were so blatant that they were actually funny.

Well, fast-forward to today, and there’s a new Baghdad Bob in town. His name is Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary. He lives by the same mantra as Bob… “Tell a lie often enough, and it becomes a truth.” And his arrogance is almost as disgraceful as his hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
If this is true, it's pretty scary that a man like this is working for Obama.
 
Omg, really? That's the most misleading title ever. That's like saying - Hitler loved dogs, Obama's secretary loves dogs, therefore Hitler works for Obama.
 
Travis, seriously, we've talked about this. Read what you post-- it says "...lives by the same mantra..." It's not the same guy!!

Honestly, Travis, I don't want to see you post anything unless it's only your own words. If I see a post by you with a link and none of your words, or if I see another quote or picture, I'm deleting it. That's ridiculous.
 
The above link does have my own words: "If this is true, it's pretty scary that a man like this is working for Obama."

Anyway, here is an incredible MUST read interview with an NSA whistleblower: http://www.naturalnews.com/040694_Edward_Snowden_Glenn_Greenwald_interview.html

It's pretty scary what can be seen of us by the government and such. As long as we're doing nothing wrong, we probably don't have to worry, but it still is pretty freaky.
 
Let me rephrase-- I want to see you put a post of more than one line when you are doing that. You didn't even read the link you posted or you wiuld have known it wasn't the same guy.

Here, a great way to do this would be to give a synopsis of this link, then give some of your opinions of what it actually means to you.
 
OK sure. I see what you mean Wasted. Also, I need to better realize how most feel on here about certain things that I keep reposting and need to stop posting some of that stuff. IE: The propaganda stuff about Obama being un-American and supporting the terrorists and such.
 
The entire NSA thing is just a mess ... more and more data being admitted to being collected. The Obama Administration apparantly asked for 1000X more warrants under the Patriot Act than Bush (According to NBC news).

Government cannot and should not be trusted ... the breach that trust on virtually every occasion.

A nice video of candidate Obama debating President Obama on this issues .. fucking hypocrit

!
 
Yea, this sort of thing reminds me why I dislike the Obama administration so much. He's a flake, he took all these bold stances when he was running for office and yet lets shit like this happen. The same thing happened with Wall Street, he let the corporations win. He furthers legislation that should've been done away with his first year in office (e.g. Patriot Act) even though he vehemently condemned Bush policies when running and even used them against his competing candidates. You're right, he's a hypocrite, and he's a flake. Completely unsuitable for POTUS.

The sad thing is comparing the tone in the two videos. Obviously 2007 Obama believes what he's saying and he's right. 2013 Obama looks tired, defeated, and not convinced in even his own words. It's like he's just letting NSA do whatever it wants. Doesn't want to get involved.
 
"You can't have a hundred per cent security and a hundred per cent privacy." I'd choose to live with the risk then, thank you.

What's interesting is that it seems like you're watching two completely different people talking there. And not only for he content. But look at how aggressive, confident and convinced of his positions candidate Obama looks in comparison to the pale, resignated president. Of course candidate Obama is reading from teleprompters, but he still delivers the words in coherent sentences, with a passion and aggression, leaving no doubt that he believes in every word he's saying. President Obama on the other hand stutters and stops, and you really have the feeling that he has no spirit and no will to say anything.
 
One strikes me as a man making a speech (passionately too, I might add) about the things he believes in. These are said with conviction presumably because they are truthful views, long held. It easy to say what you want to do (& summarise what is right & proper); it's a little different (once you are inside the machine, & perhaps things are revealed to you that you did not otherwise have knowledge about) doing those things.

The later clips (i.e. Obama now) strike me (as Mosh & Perun say) as a man who does not really believe truly what he is saying. As a result, he comes across as far less passionate & far less convincing. Who wouldn't, in his position? He has struggled to deliver what he wants; all those things (that vision) that he spoke about before being elected. I don't particularly think this makes him a hypocrite, as I'd guess he still thinks all those things. Poor President though? Poor leader? If you judge that he has been unable to deliver his own vision, then yes; & I'd certainly agree with that. (This, of course, assumes you believe the earlier lofty rhetoric in the first place.)
 
His whole Presidency, IMO
Mosh said:
Yea, this sort of thing reminds me why I dislike the Obama administration so much. He's a flake, he took all these bold stances when he was running for office and yet lets shit like this happen. The same thing happened with Wall Street, he let the corporations win. He furthers legislation that should've been done away with his first year in office (e.g. Patriot Act) even though he vehemently condemned Bush policies when running and even used them against his competing candidates. You're right, he's a hypocrite, and he's a flake. Completely unsuitable for POTUS.

The sad thing is comparing the tone in the two videos. Obviously 2007 Obama believes what he's saying and he's right. 2013 Obama looks tired, defeated, and not convinced in even his own words. It's like he's just letting NSA do whatever it wants. Doesn't want to get involved.
Click to expand...


This sums up his entire Presidency IMO. Think back to ObamaCare, when the debate came up about the "government option", he took no firm position on that and left many in his own party out to dry. Once it started bogging down in Congress, he pretty much took the attitude of "just pass anything and I'll sign it" which is not leadership.

He seems like a person who likes the spotlight, is a great orator, but is unwilling to go all in on what he believes. I understand compromise is needed, but if not on stuff like this. Too bad all this did not come out a year ago (and someone much better than Romney was running against him)
 
Cartoon

7879_10151527424448473_323813920_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top