Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
National security internet trouble
23 views
Skip to first unread message
Frogwatch
Apr 9, 2012, 1:02:40 PM4/9/12
to
I've never given much thought to the ramifications to what I google or
investigate online but I wonder if I should. Recently, I was talking
to someone who works for a large optics company as he was trying to
sell me a radiation detector. We discussed high energy radiation
(gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
weapons materials. He confessed to having done some googling of nuke
weapons stuff, specifically the "Nuclear Weapons FAQ" which basically
provides a lot of detailed nuke weapon info and he was worried he
might be on someones watch list now. I agree he might be as he is
from either India or Pakistan (I cannot tell from his name but I think
probably India).
However, as average Joe american with a legit interest in such stuff
from previous work and current work, I wonder how careful I should be
about looking at stuff such online. Should one try to hide ones
searches in fear of being investigated or should one simply say to
himself, "I'm legit and they'll know I am".
What if searches are not obviously related to ones legit interests?
For example, my spectrometer measures nitrogen better than anything
else and most explosives contain Nitrogen so I googled various
explosives to look into detecting explosive residue. Of course I also
googled the various peroxide explosives as they do not contain
Nitrogen to see what I might see in them. What if one searches on
poison gasses for similar reasons?
The real question is: Should one worry about being "investigated" if
one has a legit reason for wanting to know something?
Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
curious and has no other interest?
investigate online but I wonder if I should. Recently, I was talking
to someone who works for a large optics company as he was trying to
sell me a radiation detector. We discussed high energy radiation
(gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
weapons materials. He confessed to having done some googling of nuke
weapons stuff, specifically the "Nuclear Weapons FAQ" which basically
provides a lot of detailed nuke weapon info and he was worried he
might be on someones watch list now. I agree he might be as he is
from either India or Pakistan (I cannot tell from his name but I think
probably India).
However, as average Joe american with a legit interest in such stuff
from previous work and current work, I wonder how careful I should be
about looking at stuff such online. Should one try to hide ones
searches in fear of being investigated or should one simply say to
himself, "I'm legit and they'll know I am".
What if searches are not obviously related to ones legit interests?
For example, my spectrometer measures nitrogen better than anything
else and most explosives contain Nitrogen so I googled various
explosives to look into detecting explosive residue. Of course I also
googled the various peroxide explosives as they do not contain
Nitrogen to see what I might see in them. What if one searches on
poison gasses for similar reasons?
The real question is: Should one worry about being "investigated" if
one has a legit reason for wanting to know something?
Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
curious and has no other interest?
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 1:13:38 PM4/9/12
to
national security agency would use to cull those that interest them.
How they would locate the searcher - in Britain there is now a law (or
soon to be one) that makes it possible for the security services to
demand this data from an ISP. But most lookups will only end at an
ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
law.
Eugene L Griessel
Ours is the age which is proud of machines that can think
and suspicious of men who try to.
La N.
Apr 9, 2012, 1:44:09 PM4/9/12
to
"Eugene Griessel" <eug...@dynagen.co.za> wrote in message
news:8t56o7hqdcpn8tumn...@4ax.com...
> >
> I wonder how many million searches are done a day. What criteria a
> national security agency would use to cull those that interest them.
> How they would locate the searcher - in Britain there is now a law (or
> soon to be one) that makes it possible for the security services to
> demand this data from an ISP. But most lookups will only end at an
> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
> What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
> law.
Speaking of court of law, here's good news for some of you:
> I wonder how many million searches are done a day. What criteria a
> national security agency would use to cull those that interest them.
> How they would locate the searcher - in Britain there is now a law (or
> soon to be one) that makes it possible for the security services to
> demand this data from an ISP. But most lookups will only end at an
> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
> What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
> law.
http://rt.com/usa/news/judge-porn-torrent-download-488/
"A California judge has blocked an attempt to prosecute alleged downloaders
of copyrighted material in a move which is being championed as a win for
American users of the Internet."
- nilita
Bill
Apr 9, 2012, 1:58:56 PM4/9/12
to
In article <8t56o7hqdcpn8tumn...@4ax.com>,
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program and sort by name or
email address.
Users of the data base then search on that as well.
The almost certain reason the spooks are asking for this is because it
is now just about possible to build such a system (for a very great deal
of money) that'll handle that amount of data and their geeks fancy
building it.
> What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
> law.
It won't be any way, the GCHQ spooks won that battle last year.
--
William Black
When you hear the words 'Our people are our greatest asset' then it's
time to leave.
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>
But most lookups will only end at an
> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
Very little I'd imagine.
But most lookups will only end at an
> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program and sort by name or
email address.
Users of the data base then search on that as well.
The almost certain reason the spooks are asking for this is because it
is now just about possible to build such a system (for a very great deal
of money) that'll handle that amount of data and their geeks fancy
building it.
> What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
> law.
--
William Black
When you hear the words 'Our people are our greatest asset' then it's
time to leave.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 2:11:30 PM4/9/12
to
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <8t56o7hqdcpn8tumn...@4ax.com>,
>eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
> But most lookups will only end at an
>> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
>> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
>> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
>
>Very little I'd imagine.
>
>You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program and sort by name or
>email address.
When you do a search those criteria are not readily available - only
>In article <8t56o7hqdcpn8tumn...@4ax.com>,
>eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
> But most lookups will only end at an
>> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
>> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
>> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
>
>Very little I'd imagine.
>
>You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program and sort by name or
>email address.
your IP number is. Which means laborious who-is lookups to determine
whether the searcher is (a) even in your country (b) what their ISP
is. Then contact the ISP and find out who it was - always remembering
that with dynamic IP numbering it becomes very awkward to determine
exactly who was using it precisely at that time.
Eugene L Griessel
Death is every man's privilege.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 2:13:26 PM4/9/12
to
prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
Eugene L Griessel
Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 2:21:27 PM4/9/12
to
>You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
Eugene L Griessel
Let's have real democracy. An annual plebiscite to determine
politicians wages.
Frogwatch
Apr 9, 2012, 2:21:25 PM4/9/12
to
purposes. I am not discussing prosecution but simply someone
producing a "file" on someone based on what sort of information they
download..............oh yeah, google already does that.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 2:25:20 PM4/9/12
to
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 11:21:25 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
<ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >Speaking of court of law, here's good news for some of you:
>>
>> >http://rt.com/usa/news/judge-porn-torrent-download-488/
>>
>> >"A California judge has blocked an attempt to prosecute alleged downloaders
>> >of copyrighted material in a move which is being championed as a win for
>> >American users of the Internet."
>>
>> Why is the law so arse-about face these days. The correct entity to
>> prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
>> catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
<ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >Speaking of court of law, here's good news for some of you:
>>
>> >http://rt.com/usa/news/judge-porn-torrent-download-488/
>>
>> >"A California judge has blocked an attempt to prosecute alleged downloaders
>> >of copyrighted material in a move which is being championed as a win for
>> >American users of the Internet."
>>
>> Why is the law so arse-about face these days. The correct entity to
>> prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
>> catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
>Why prosecute the uploader? Most stuff will not be used for nefarious
>purposes. I am not discussing prosecution but simply someone
>producing a "file" on someone based on what sort of information they
>download..............oh yeah, google already does that.
The comment I was replying to had to do with copyrighted material. As
>purposes. I am not discussing prosecution but simply someone
>producing a "file" on someone based on what sort of information they
>download..............oh yeah, google already does that.
above.
As for your question - most of the stuff on the web is available in
books and public libraries. They are certainly not going to have an
agent sitting in every one of those to check out what people are
browsing through, are they?
Eugene L Griessel
The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe
is that it has never tried to contact us.
Bill
Apr 9, 2012, 4:05:51 PM4/9/12
to
In article <jc96o7dd7kdhufl5a...@4ax.com>,
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
The legislation, which now looks like going down the tubes, requires
the ISP to provide real time access.
After you've got that it's a case of applying enough computer power to
the data.
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
the ISP to provide real time access.
After you've got that it's a case of applying enough computer power to
the data.
Bill
Apr 9, 2012, 4:06:21 PM4/9/12
to
In article <r3a6o79vcivnlrt89...@4ax.com>,
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
But you know what I mean...
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>
> Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
Probably, I've been out of the game for over half a decade now.
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>
> Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
But you know what I mean...
scott s.
Apr 9, 2012, 4:13:54 PM4/9/12
to
Eugene Griessel <eug...@dynagen.co.za> wrote in
news:26a6o7ts7gdvs2m9d...@4ax.com:
> The comment I was replying to had to do with copyrighted material.
> As above.
>
> As for your question - most of the stuff on the web is available in
> books and public libraries. They are certainly not going to have an
> agent sitting in every one of those to check out what people are
> browsing through, are they?
>
holder wanting to sue for infringement. In this case they had gotten
the IP address of someone(s) using bittorrent and want the court to
force the ISP owning that address to identify the customer to which the
numer was assigned. This is a common tactic used in many legal
jurisdictions. In many cases it isn't even the rights-holder who
does it, but a law firm on a fishing expedition. The business model is
to get the names and send letters offerring to accept a payment as
setlement in lieu of suit on behalf of the rights holder.
scott s.
.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 4:25:47 PM4/9/12
to
legal. So if I come in from Upper Slobovistan and search for
something all their computer power is usless - they would still have
to get their data out of the ISP in LazyMullah city (the capital) and
to do that would take some real diplomatic moves (or excellent and
illegal hacking).
Eugene L Griessel
Have you ever felt like a small hairless rodent, lost in the outback of
Australia, looking for water, and suddenly noticing that your shadow is
getting larger and larger, and has wings? -- Quasi
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 4:27:41 PM4/9/12
to
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 21:06:21 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <r3a6o79vcivnlrt89...@4ax.com>,
>eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>>
>> Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
>
>Probably, I've been out of the game for over half a decade now.
>
>But you know what I mean...
It's one of the slowest sort algorithms I think I know. Way back when
>In article <r3a6o79vcivnlrt89...@4ax.com>,
>eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>>
>> Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
>
>Probably, I've been out of the game for over half a decade now.
>
>But you know what I mean...
we'd try and speed it up by a pre-sort into categories and then sort
each category and then amalgamate again.
Eugene L Griessel
An absurdity so colossal, that it took on the air of a great truth.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 4:29:51 PM4/9/12
to
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:13:54 -0500, "scott s." <75270...@csi.xcom>
wrote:
It's still going for the wrong end of the crime as far as I'm
concerned. The publisher of the copyrighted material is who they
should be going after.
Eugene L Griessel
Many people quit looking for work when they find a job.
wrote:
concerned. The publisher of the copyrighted material is who they
should be going after.
Eugene L Griessel
Many people quit looking for work when they find a job.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 4:33:13 PM4/9/12
to
>When you hear the words 'Our people are our greatest asset' then it's
>time to leave.
I believe Nelson said something like it after the battle of the Nile.
>time to leave.
Eugene L Griessel
The Rumplestilskin Principle: Just because you have a name for it
does not mean you understand it!
scott s.
Apr 9, 2012, 4:41:42 PM4/9/12
to
Frogwatch <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in news:9fa32621-1943-446a-
bd3a-358...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
tor browser?
scott s.
.
bd3a-358...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:
tor browser?
scott s.
.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 9, 2012, 4:51:18 PM4/9/12
to
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:41:42 -0500, "scott s." <75270...@csi.xcom>
wrote:
>> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
>> curious and has no other interest?
>
>Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
>tor browser?
And if you really want to know how to make a bicycle deliverable
cluster napalm bomb from home ingredients - pop down to an internet
caf and do it from there.
Eugene L Griessel
Little improvement can be expected in morality until the producing
of large families is regarded with the same feelings as drunkenness
or any other physical excess. - John Stuart Mill
wrote:
>> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
>> curious and has no other interest?
>
>Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
>tor browser?
cluster napalm bomb from home ingredients - pop down to an internet
caf and do it from there.
Eugene L Griessel
Little improvement can be expected in morality until the producing
of large families is regarded with the same feelings as drunkenness
or any other physical excess. - John Stuart Mill
Keith W
Apr 9, 2012, 5:19:01 PM4/9/12
to
Frogwatch wrote:
> I've never given much thought to the ramifications to what I google or
> investigate online but I wonder if I should. Recently, I was talking
> to someone who works for a large optics company as he was trying to
> sell me a radiation detector. We discussed high energy radiation
> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> weapons materials. He confessed to having done some googling of nuke
> weapons stuff, specifically the "Nuclear Weapons FAQ" which basically
> provides a lot of detailed nuke weapon info and he was worried he
> might be on someones watch list now. I agree he might be as he is
> from either India or Pakistan (I cannot tell from his name but I think
> probably India).
>
> However, as average Joe american with a legit interest in such stuff
> from previous work and current work, I wonder how careful I should be
> about looking at stuff such online. Should one try to hide ones
> searches in fear of being investigated or should one simply say to
> himself, "I'm legit and they'll know I am".
>
If they arrested everyone who googled those sites they'd have to
> I've never given much thought to the ramifications to what I google or
> investigate online but I wonder if I should. Recently, I was talking
> to someone who works for a large optics company as he was trying to
> sell me a radiation detector. We discussed high energy radiation
> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> weapons materials. He confessed to having done some googling of nuke
> weapons stuff, specifically the "Nuclear Weapons FAQ" which basically
> provides a lot of detailed nuke weapon info and he was worried he
> might be on someones watch list now. I agree he might be as he is
> from either India or Pakistan (I cannot tell from his name but I think
> probably India).
>
> However, as average Joe american with a legit interest in such stuff
> from previous work and current work, I wonder how careful I should be
> about looking at stuff such online. Should one try to hide ones
> searches in fear of being investigated or should one simply say to
> himself, "I'm legit and they'll know I am".
>
lock up half the western world and all that info is available via
your local public library anyway.
Keith
Dean
Apr 9, 2012, 5:26:57 PM4/9/12
to
Professional interest here, you can reply to me at
dmar...@opsecsecurity.com.
Dennis
Apr 9, 2012, 6:05:17 PM4/9/12
to
Eugene Griessel wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:41:42 -0500, "scott s." <75270...@csi.xcom>
> wrote:
>
>>> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
>>> curious and has no other interest?
>>
>>Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
>>tor browser?
>
> And if you really want to know how to make a bicycle deliverable
> cluster napalm bomb from home ingredients - pop down to an internet
> caf and do it from there.
Yes, if I were sufficiently worried, I'd use a Tor browser. Slows things
> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:41:42 -0500, "scott s." <75270...@csi.xcom>
> wrote:
>
>>> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
>>> curious and has no other interest?
>>
>>Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
>>tor browser?
>
> And if you really want to know how to make a bicycle deliverable
> cluster napalm bomb from home ingredients - pop down to an internet
> caf and do it from there.
down a bit, but that's all. If really worried, go to an Internet cafe'.
I read "The Unexpected Patriot: How an Ordinary American Mother Is Bringing
Terrorists to Justice" by Shannen Rossmiller. She mostly used a lot of
sockpuppets and trolled jihadist chat and bulletin boards to catch the
people she did, in cooperation with the military and the FBI.
Dennis
Bill
Apr 9, 2012, 6:41:53 PM4/9/12
to
In article <09h6o7lsp39s7pilp...@4ax.com>,
If you're a foreigner they don't care, one assumes they have mechanisms
in place to handle that.
This is about legalities.
At the moment they need a warrant signed by a minister of cabinet rank
to go after a UK resident.
That's what they want to get rid of.
in place to handle that.
This is about legalities.
At the moment they need a warrant signed by a minister of cabinet rank
to go after a UK resident.
That's what they want to get rid of.
Bill
Apr 9, 2012, 6:44:24 PM4/9/12
to
In article <ori6o75338e2e104r...@4ax.com>,
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
app and do it all from home, or from your local McDonalds if you want
to save money...
eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>
> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:41:42 -0500, "scott s." <75270...@csi.xcom>
> wrote:
>
> >> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
> >> curious and has no other interest?
> >
> >Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
> >tor browser?
>
> And if you really want to know how to make a bicycle deliverable
> cluster napalm bomb from home ingredients - pop down to an internet
> caf and do it from there.
Or buy a smartphone and an anonymous PAYG SIM and use the WiFi tethering
> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:41:42 -0500, "scott s." <75270...@csi.xcom>
> wrote:
>
> >> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
> >> curious and has no other interest?
> >
> >Don't know if one "should" worry, but if they do, maybe check out a
> >tor browser?
>
> And if you really want to know how to make a bicycle deliverable
> cluster napalm bomb from home ingredients - pop down to an internet
> caf and do it from there.
app and do it all from home, or from your local McDonalds if you want
to save money...
Frogwatch
Apr 9, 2012, 6:29:00 PM4/9/12
to
> > On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:41:42 -0500, "scott s." <75270_37...@csi.xcom>
Not worried but wondering if I should be. Guess not.
jonathan
Apr 9, 2012, 8:49:48 PM4/9/12
to
"Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> I've never given much thought to the ramifications to what I google or
> investigate online but I wonder if I should. Recently, I was talking
> to someone who works for a large optics company as he was trying to
> sell me a radiation detector.
>We discussed high energy radiation
> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> weapons materials.
already, they will be soon enough.
>
> The real question is: Should one worry about being "investigated" if
> one has a legit reason for wanting to know something?
work place? And if you have a boss, will he be
understanding on any heat you bring down on
him too?
>
> Second Question: Should one worry about searches if one is simply
> curious and has no other interest?
concerned if you're doing anything illegal, planning to
something illegal or give the distinct impression to a
reasonable person you might be about to something
illegal.
And don't think encryption will help, by US law all
encryption has a govt back door.
Since you mentioned weapons grade material, why
shouldn't I report you myself???
https://tips.fbi.gov/
s
Andrew Swallow
Apr 9, 2012, 9:03:42 PM4/9/12
to
On 09/04/2012 18:58, Bill wrote:
> In article<8t56o7hqdcpn8tumn...@4ax.com>,
> eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
> But most lookups will only end at an
>> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
>> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
>> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
>
> Very little I'd imagine.
>
> You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program and sort by name or
> email address.
>
> Users of the data base then search on that as well.
>
> The almost certain reason the spooks are asking for this is because it
> is now just about possible to build such a system (for a very great deal
> of money) that'll handle that amount of data and their geeks fancy
> building it.
>
>
>
>> What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
>> law.
>
> It won't be any way, the GCHQ spooks won that battle last year.
>
GCHQ can tap any international link it wants. It is small internet
> In article<8t56o7hqdcpn8tumn...@4ax.com>,
> eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
> But most lookups will only end at an
>> ISP and one would need access to their data to locate the individual
>> searcher. And just how much manpower will it take to sift through
>> this huge amount of data and sort the wheat from the chaff.
>
> Very little I'd imagine.
>
> You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program and sort by name or
> email address.
>
> Users of the data base then search on that as well.
>
> The almost certain reason the spooks are asking for this is because it
> is now just about possible to build such a system (for a very great deal
> of money) that'll handle that amount of data and their geeks fancy
> building it.
>
>
>
>> What would they do anyway? I doubt it could be used in a court of
>> law.
>
> It won't be any way, the GCHQ spooks won that battle last year.
>
companies and the police that need a new law.
Andrew Swallow
Andrew Swallow
Apr 9, 2012, 9:06:54 PM4/9/12
to
On 09/04/2012 19:13, Eugene Griessel wrote:
{snip}
prosecute itself.
Andrew Swallow
{snip}
> Why is the law so arse-about face these days. The correct entity to
> prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
> catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
Hollywood wants to prosecute people who do not pay it does not want to
> prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
> catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
prosecute itself.
Andrew Swallow
Andrew Swallow
Apr 9, 2012, 9:12:06 PM4/9/12
to
On 09/04/2012 21:25, Eugene Griessel wrote:
{snip}
they do not write rules for there. No one had told them that in
international businesses, like films, international law out ranks local
law (such as the US Constitution).
Andrew Swallow
{snip}
> But that would only apply in the country in which the legislation is
> legal. So if I come in from Upper Slobovistan and search for
> something all their computer power is usless - they would still have
> to get their data out of the ISP in LazyMullah city (the capital) and
> to do that would take some real diplomatic moves (or excellent and
> illegal hacking).
>
Hollywood lawyers are not licensed to practice in Upper Slobovistan so
> legal. So if I come in from Upper Slobovistan and search for
> something all their computer power is usless - they would still have
> to get their data out of the ISP in LazyMullah city (the capital) and
> to do that would take some real diplomatic moves (or excellent and
> illegal hacking).
>
they do not write rules for there. No one had told them that in
international businesses, like films, international law out ranks local
law (such as the US Constitution).
Andrew Swallow
jonathan
Apr 9, 2012, 11:31:02 PM4/9/12
to
"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.29ed519b4...@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <r3a6o79vcivnlrt89...@4ax.com>,
> eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>>
I doubt if the public knows half the story of the software
> eug...@dynagen.co.za says...
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>>
capabilities used by our various intelligence agencies..
Below is a ..partial list from the In-Q-Tell 'Portfolio'.
"IN-Q-TELL identifies, adapts, and delivers innovative
technology solutions to support the missions of the
Central Intelligence Agency and the broader US intelligence
community"
http://www.iqt.org/
Digital Reasoning
"Digital Reasoning Systems solves the problem of information overload
by providing the tools people need to understand relationships
between entities in vast amounts of unstructured and structured data"
Quantum4D
"It integrates large data sets into sophisticated models producing moving
visual representations that enable users to identify trends, relationships
and anomalies in real time data....to analyze and simulate large datasets
in a fraction of the time"
NovoDynamics
"NovoDynamics Inc., ...creating state-of-the-art applications that
integrate techniques in pattern recognition, data mining, and
image analysis."
Visible Technologies
"Comprehensive social media monitoring, analysis, and engagement
solutions...with a common need to engage within this new and
rapidly-evolving landscape of social media, including monitoring
and interacting with the most important sites, "
Rich, dynamic visual intelligence
"GeoIQ enables... organizations to fuse together massive amounts of
information from numerous data sources, analyze it using location
as the common pivot point and clearly identify trends"
RedSeal Networks
"Unlike systems that detect attacks once they occur, RedSeal
identifies holes in the security infrastructure that could be exploited"
Recorded Future
"Temporal analysis engine"
"Recorded Future extracts time and event information from the web.
The company offers users new ways to analyze the past, present,
and the predicted future."
CopperEye
"CopperEye...eliminate the economic, technical and operational
barriers to storing and accessing massive volumes of data."
ReversingLabs
"...dedicated to the analysis of all unknown binary content. TitaniumCore,
...removes all protection and obfuscation artifacts, unwraps formatting
elements and extracts relevant meta-data. ReversingLabs offers a complex
ad-hoc query engine for rapid result retrieval at great scale."
Cleversafe
"Cleversafe is the leader in resilient storage solutions, ideally suited
for storage clouds and massive digital archives."
GeoIQ
iMove
"...is a new form of digital interactive video that uses multiple cameras
to capture and seamlessly display video from panoramic views up to
complete 360° x 360° spherical views, placing the user in the scene
with the ability to look in every direction and move through space.
Our surveillance solutions include products for real-time monitoring
of wide area critical infrastructure and geospatial intelligence image
collection"
3VR
"3VR, Inc., the video intelligence company, enables organizations
to search, mine and leverage video to bolster security,"
piXlogic
"piXlogic develops and markets software solutions that make
the contents of images and videos automatically searchable."
SpotterRF
Micro Surveillance Radar
SpotterRF is the leader in Micro Surveillance Radar, a new class of radar
that is small enough to hold in your hand but powerful enough to track a
person walking anywhere within a 148 acre space
http://www.iqt.org/technology-portfolio/index-information-communications-technology.htmlhttp://www.iqt.org/
Exploiting Physiological Intelligence
"The on-site determination of individual human traits for
intelligence community purposes"
"Most travelers who fly regularly within the United States
will have had their hands or carry-on baggage swabbed by
airport security personnel to test for the presence of explosives
residue."
"Only recently have engineers and molecular biologists begun
...to quickly and unambiguously collect and exploit DNA-based
human identity and relationship data....there are efforts underway
to exploit other biological signatures.."
"...chemicals that have been breathed in, eaten, or absorbed
through the skin."
"...identifying, among other signatures, chemical compounds
from humans that are uniquely correlated with both disease states
(such as stomach ulcers)..."
"..the analysis of breath is progressing far beyond the
familiar traffic stop breathalyzer."
"In intelligence use cases, however, samples may have to be
collected without a subject's knowledge."
http://www.iqt.org/technology-portfolio/on-our-radar/Physiological_Intelligence.pdf
I wonder what they have that's ...secret?
s
jonathan
Apr 9, 2012, 11:44:54 PM4/9/12
to
"Eugene Griessel" <eug...@dynagen.co.za> wrote in message
news:09h6o7lsp39s7pilp...@4ax.com...
is the connection between your computer and the server.
That's not so easy to secure from snooping.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Frogwatch
Apr 10, 2012, 12:56:26 AM4/10/12
to
On Apr 9, 8:49 pm, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Frogwatch" <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
I've got no reason to hide my browsing. Besides, all that anonymizer
stuff seems like too much PITA.
If someone babbles nonsense on a NG, do people think it's encrypted?
I am half serious. I remember seeing weird posts on various groups
consisting of nonsense sentences, never knew what they were.
> "Frogwatch" <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
stuff seems like too much PITA.
If someone babbles nonsense on a NG, do people think it's encrypted?
I am half serious. I remember seeing weird posts on various groups
consisting of nonsense sentences, never knew what they were.
Eugene Griessel
Apr 10, 2012, 1:34:37 AM4/10/12
to
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 21:56:26 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
<ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>If someone babbles nonsense on a NG, do people think it's encrypted?
>I am half serious. I remember seeing weird posts on various groups
>consisting of nonsense sentences, never knew what they were.
You really should stop reading Warhol's posts.
<ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>If someone babbles nonsense on a NG, do people think it's encrypted?
>I am half serious. I remember seeing weird posts on various groups
>consisting of nonsense sentences, never knew what they were.
Eugene L Griessel
Saw It... Wanted It... Had A Fit... Got It!
La N.
Apr 10, 2012, 1:38:30 AM4/10/12
to
news:6ih7o7tuerjr4i4o6...@4ax.com...
- nilita
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 21:56:26 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
> <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>>If someone babbles nonsense on a NG, do people think it's encrypted?
>>I am half serious. I remember seeing weird posts on various groups
>>consisting of nonsense sentences, never knew what they were.
>
> You really should stop reading Warhol's posts.
>
zzbunker comes to mind ... I kind of miss that entity ...
> <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>>If someone babbles nonsense on a NG, do people think it's encrypted?
>>I am half serious. I remember seeing weird posts on various groups
>>consisting of nonsense sentences, never knew what they were.
>
> You really should stop reading Warhol's posts.
>
- nilita
Keith W
Apr 10, 2012, 3:24:00 AM4/10/12
to
Archiving all that data for delivery to the security services
is a major cost they could do without.
Keith
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 7:28:33 AM4/10/12
to
In article <-tqdnUgJRs6LGR7S...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
> And don't think encryption will help, by US law all
> encryption has a govt back door.
Don't you just love the idea that every company selling some form of
encryption has to do what the US government says...
wr...@gmail.com says...
> And don't think encryption will help, by US law all
> encryption has a govt back door.
encryption has to do what the US government says...
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 9:56:30 AM4/10/12
to
"Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> We discussed high energy radiation
> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> weapons materials.
be reported for this statement?
Jonathan
s
He confessed to having done some googling of nuke
> weapons stuff, specifically the "Nuclear Weapons FAQ" which basically
> provides a lot of detailed nuke weapon info and he was worried he
> might be on someones watch list now. I agree he might be as he is
> from either India or Pakistan (I cannot tell from his name but I think
> probably India).
>
> However, as average Joe american with a legit interest in such stuff
> from previous work and current work, I wonder how careful I should be
> about looking at stuff such online. Should one try to hide ones
> searches in fear of being investigated or should one simply say to
> himself, "I'm legit and they'll know I am".
>
> What if searches are not obviously related to ones legit interests?
> For example, my spectrometer measures nitrogen better than anything
> else and most explosives contain Nitrogen so I googled various
> explosives to look into detecting explosive residue. Of course I also
> googled the various peroxide explosives as they do not contain
> Nitrogen to see what I might see in them. What if one searches on
> poison gasses for similar reasons?
>
> The real question is: Should one worry about being "investigated" if
> one has a legit reason for wanting to know something?
>
> one has a legit reason for wanting to know something?
>
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 9:59:48 AM4/10/12
to
In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
wr...@gmail.com says...
>
> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> > We discussed high energy radiation
> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> > weapons materials.
>
>
> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
> be reported for this statement?
Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> > We discussed high energy radiation
> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> > weapons materials.
>
>
> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
> be reported for this statement?
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 10:55:49 AM4/10/12
to
news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
legally be in the same room with such material?
If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI. That post is either...
1) From an internet loon, and idle chat
2) From a potential criminal of the worst kind
3) From an undercover agent trolling for terrorists
In any of those, better safe then sorry
https://tips.fbi.gov/
> In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>> > We discussed high energy radiation
>> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
>> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
>> > weapons materials.
>>
>>
>> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
>> be reported for this statement?
>
> Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>> > We discussed high energy radiation
>> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
>> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
>> > weapons materials.
>>
>>
>> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
>> be reported for this statement?
>
> Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
legally be in the same room with such material?
If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI. That post is either...
1) From an internet loon, and idle chat
2) From a potential criminal of the worst kind
3) From an undercover agent trolling for terrorists
In any of those, better safe then sorry
https://tips.fbi.gov/
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 10:58:46 AM4/10/12
to
news:26a6o7ts7gdvs2m9d...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 11:21:25 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
> <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>> >Speaking of court of law, here's good news for some of you:
>>>
>>> >http://rt.com/usa/news/judge-porn-torrent-download-488/
>>>
>>> >"A California judge has blocked an attempt to prosecute alleged
>>> >downloaders
>>> >of copyrighted material in a move which is being championed as a win
>>> >for
>>> >American users of the Internet."
>>purposes. I am not discussing prosecution but simply someone
>>producing a "file" on someone based on what sort of information they
>>download..............oh yeah, google already does that.
>
> The comment I was replying to had to do with copyrighted material. As
> above.
>
> As for your question - most of the stuff on the web is available in
> books and public libraries. They are certainly not going to have an
> agent sitting in every one of those to check out what people are
> browsing through, are they?
>
Yes, they do.
>
> Eugene L Griessel
>
> The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe
> is that it has never tried to contact us.
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 11:21:25 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
> <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>> >Speaking of court of law, here's good news for some of you:
>>>
>>> >http://rt.com/usa/news/judge-porn-torrent-download-488/
>>>
>>> >"A California judge has blocked an attempt to prosecute alleged
>>> >downloaders
>>> >of copyrighted material in a move which is being championed as a win
>>> >for
>>> >American users of the Internet."
>>>
>>> Why is the law so arse-about face these days. The correct entity to
>>> prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
>>> catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
>
>>Why prosecute the uploader? Most stuff will not be used for nefarious
>>> Why is the law so arse-about face these days. The correct entity to
>>> prosecute is the uploader not the downloader. Course it's easier to
>>> catch the downloader and probably easier to prosecute.
>
>>purposes. I am not discussing prosecution but simply someone
>>producing a "file" on someone based on what sort of information they
>>download..............oh yeah, google already does that.
>
> The comment I was replying to had to do with copyrighted material. As
> above.
>
> As for your question - most of the stuff on the web is available in
> books and public libraries. They are certainly not going to have an
> agent sitting in every one of those to check out what people are
> browsing through, are they?
>
Yes, they do.
>
> Eugene L Griessel
>
> The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe
> is that it has never tried to contact us.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Eugene Griessel
Apr 10, 2012, 11:24:42 AM4/10/12
to
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:58:46 -0400, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
They would do better having someone checking out paranoids - they'd
net you immediately.
As to why Froggy is interested in measuring things - he happens to own
a company that develops and manufactures high precision measuring
instrumentation - especially in esoteric fields.
Eugene L Griessel
My decision is *Maybe* and that's final.
wrote:
net you immediately.
As to why Froggy is interested in measuring things - he happens to own
a company that develops and manufactures high precision measuring
instrumentation - especially in esoteric fields.
Eugene L Griessel
My decision is *Maybe* and that's final.
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 11:57:15 AM4/10/12
to
news:3f2a7563-8fd4-4e7d...@f37g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
............................
If you visit sites that have 'dangerous' information, and especially
what you post to ng's, you can be sure the Intelligence Community
is watching. There are many agencies involved these days.
Even the military is involved in watching cyberspace....
"the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Central Command have been
developing deceptive identities on the Internet in order to
infiltrate chat rooms and other social media using a special
software.3"
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/dime/documents/Terroist%20Use%20of%20Internet%20IO.pdf
If you visit sites that have 'dangerous' information, and especially
what you post to ng's, you can be sure the Intelligence Community
is watching. There are many agencies involved these days.
Even the military is involved in watching cyberspace....
"the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Central Command have been
developing deceptive identities on the Internet in order to
infiltrate chat rooms and other social media using a special
software.3"
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/dime/documents/Terroist%20Use%20of%20Internet%20IO.pdf
Eugene Griessel
Apr 10, 2012, 11:59:15 AM4/10/12
to
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:57:15 -0400, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>If you visit sites that have 'dangerous' information, and especially
>what you post to ng's, you can be sure the Intelligence Community
>is watching. There are many agencies involved these days.
>Even the military is involved in watching cyberspace....
If they were you would have been carted off already.
Eugene L Griessel
Almost all loan officers have artificial hearts.
wrote:
>
>If you visit sites that have 'dangerous' information, and especially
>what you post to ng's, you can be sure the Intelligence Community
>is watching. There are many agencies involved these days.
>Even the military is involved in watching cyberspace....
Eugene L Griessel
Almost all loan officers have artificial hearts.
Dennis
Apr 10, 2012, 12:07:49 PM4/10/12
to
Frogwatch wrote:
>> Yes, if I were sufficiently worried, I'd use a Tor browser. Slows
>> thin
> gs
>> down a bit, but that's all. If really worried, go to an Internet
>> cafe'
> .
>>
>> I read "The Unexpected Patriot: How an Ordinary American Mother Is
>> Bringi
> ng
>> Terrorists to Justice" by Shannen Rossmiller. She mostly used a lot
>> of sockpuppets and trolled jihadist chat and bulletin boards to catch
>> the people she did, in cooperation with the military and the FBI.
>>
>> Dennis
>
> Not worried but wondering if I should be. Guess not.
I can see how a search algorithm might finger someone who had done quite a
>> Yes, if I were sufficiently worried, I'd use a Tor browser. Slows
>> thin
> gs
>> down a bit, but that's all. If really worried, go to an Internet
>> cafe'
> .
>>
>> I read "The Unexpected Patriot: How an Ordinary American Mother Is
>> Bringi
> ng
>> Terrorists to Justice" by Shannen Rossmiller. She mostly used a lot
>> of sockpuppets and trolled jihadist chat and bulletin boards to catch
>> the people she did, in cooperation with the military and the FBI.
>>
>> Dennis
>
> Not worried but wondering if I should be. Guess not.
bit of looking, along perhaps with political topics. It depends. What
Shannen Rossmiller did what quite different from what the NSA does.
Dennis
Dennis
Apr 10, 2012, 12:09:44 PM4/10/12
to
jonathan wrote:
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
>
> If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
> certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI. That post is either...
>
> 1) From an internet loon, and idle chat
Has anyone reported Warhol?
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
>
> If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
> certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI. That post is either...
>
> 1) From an internet loon, and idle chat
Dennis
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 12:11:47 PM4/10/12
to
news:71k8o75dd7grr4age...@4ax.com...
There's a reason the US hasn't had a major terrorist
attack since 9/11, and it isn't because our intellgence
community is half-assed, but quite the opposite.
> As to why Froggy is interested in measuring things - he happens to own
> a company that develops and manufactures high precision measuring
> instrumentation - especially in esoteric fields.
Bomb grade nuclear material is hardly an esoteric field.
I'm shocked more people aren't worried when someone
states they want to have the ability to measure weapon
grade nuclear material. We can rest assured a half dozen
agencies have noticed this thread.
That's not being paranoid at all. That's just the reality
of the current times. For instance, even the military
has units dedicated to monitoring and infiltrating just
such Internet activity. And I'm not saying that's a
bad thing either, quite the contrary.
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/dime/documents/Terroist%20Use%20of%20Internet%20IO.pdf
attack since 9/11, and it isn't because our intellgence
community is half-assed, but quite the opposite.
> As to why Froggy is interested in measuring things - he happens to own
> a company that develops and manufactures high precision measuring
> instrumentation - especially in esoteric fields.
I'm shocked more people aren't worried when someone
states they want to have the ability to measure weapon
grade nuclear material. We can rest assured a half dozen
agencies have noticed this thread.
That's not being paranoid at all. That's just the reality
of the current times. For instance, even the military
has units dedicated to monitoring and infiltrating just
such Internet activity. And I'm not saying that's a
bad thing either, quite the contrary.
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/dime/documents/Terroist%20Use%20of%20Internet%20IO.pdf
Keith W
Apr 10, 2012, 1:33:32 PM4/10/12
to
jonathan wrote:
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
>> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>>
>>> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>> We discussed high energy radiation
>>>> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in
>>>> spent nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving
>>>> possible weapons materials.
>>>
>>>
>>> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
>>> be reported for this statement?
>>
>> Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>
>
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
>
There is nothing illegal in having an interest in such things.
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
>> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>>
>>> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>> We discussed high energy radiation
>>>> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in
>>>> spent nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving
>>>> possible weapons materials.
>>>
>>>
>>> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
>>> be reported for this statement?
>>
>> Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>
>
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
>
Indeed I know people who work in the nuclear industry
and do it for a living. What you can sign up for courses
on the subject given by the IAEA in multiple languages
which include Chinese and Russian.
Keith
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 2:31:02 PM4/10/12
to
news:e5m8o79fu8tbnb2oc...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:57:15 -0400, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>If you visit sites that have 'dangerous' information, and especially
>>what you post to ng's, you can be sure the Intelligence Community
>>is watching. There are many agencies involved these days.
>>Even the military is involved in watching cyberspace....
>
> If they were you would have been carted off already.
>
> Eugene L Griessel
Are you a cop? <g>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>If you visit sites that have 'dangerous' information, and especially
>>what you post to ng's, you can be sure the Intelligence Community
>>is watching. There are many agencies involved these days.
>>Even the military is involved in watching cyberspace....
>
> If they were you would have been carted off already.
>
> Eugene L Griessel
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 2:34:29 PM4/10/12
to
In article <aKqdnfim4r5i1BnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
such materials.
I imagine people working as contractors to the US government have access
to such materials.
Certainly contractors working for ROF Burghfield in the UK do.
>
> If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
> certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI.
Off you go then son...
wr...@gmail.com says...
>
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>
> >> > We discussed high energy radiation
> >> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> >> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> >> > weapons materials.
> >>
> >>
> >> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
> >> be reported for this statement?
> >
> > Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>
>
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
Plenty of people quite legitimately have an interest in working with
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>
> >> > We discussed high energy radiation
> >> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> >> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> >> > weapons materials.
> >>
> >>
> >> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
> >> be reported for this statement?
> >
> > Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>
>
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
such materials.
I imagine people working as contractors to the US government have access
to such materials.
Certainly contractors working for ROF Burghfield in the UK do.
>
> If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
> certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI.
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 2:38:08 PM4/10/12
to
"Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:P9_gr.116217$Js7....@fx16.am4...
> jonathan wrote:
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
>>> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> We discussed high energy radiation
>>>>> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in
>>>>> spent nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving
>>>>> possible weapons materials.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
>>>> be reported for this statement?
>>>
>>> Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>>
>>
>> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
>> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
>> legally be in the same room with such material?
>>
>
> There is nothing illegal in having an interest
He didn't say he had an interest in learning about
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
>>> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> We discussed high energy radiation
>>>>> (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in
>>>>> spent nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving
>>>>> possible weapons materials.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
>>>> be reported for this statement?
>>>
>>> Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>>
>>
>> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
>> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
>> legally be in the same room with such material?
>>
>
> There is nothing illegal in having an interest
such things, he said he has an interest in ....doing
such things.
>in such things.
> Indeed I know people who work in the nuclear industry
> and do it for a living.
>What you can sign up for courses
> on the subject
nuclear material to 'play' around with?
Words should mean something, I'm
simply taking him at his word. I asked
him twice why he shouldn't be reported
for what he said, and he didn't reply.
Don't you find that curious? If he doesn't
care then no harm done if someone
reports him.
Jonathan
s
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 2:41:19 PM4/10/12
to
In article <yNCdnTksjpdtxhnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
Afghanistan.
>
>
> > As to why Froggy is interested in measuring things - he happens to own
> > a company that develops and manufactures high precision measuring
> > instrumentation - especially in esoteric fields.
>
>
> Bomb grade nuclear material is hardly an esoteric field.
> I'm shocked more people aren't worried when someone
> states they want to have the ability to measure weapon
> grade nuclear material. We can rest assured a half dozen
> agencies have noticed this thread.
I just love the idea that they have the time and the manpower.
I bet that's an interesting one to justify at budget time, even if they
get it down to half a dozen people.
"Well the section investigated some fifty mentions of nuclear material a
week and, erm, caught nobody, although we did get fifty seven doors
kicked in last year, (costings for repairs to the property of totally
innocent people attached at annex 6)...
Intelligence agencies pay people to get results.
Come up empty and you find yourself doing something less interesting.
Totally screw it up and you'll find yourself checking everyone else's
expenses sheets and finding out where they visited while you sat in the
office doing accounts...
wr...@gmail.com says...
>
> There's a reason the US hasn't had a major terrorist
> attack since 9/11, and it isn't because our intellgence
> community is half-assed, but quite the opposite.
It's because the terrorists are far too busy killing US| soldiers in
> There's a reason the US hasn't had a major terrorist
> attack since 9/11, and it isn't because our intellgence
> community is half-assed, but quite the opposite.
Afghanistan.
>
>
> > As to why Froggy is interested in measuring things - he happens to own
> > a company that develops and manufactures high precision measuring
> > instrumentation - especially in esoteric fields.
>
>
> Bomb grade nuclear material is hardly an esoteric field.
> I'm shocked more people aren't worried when someone
> states they want to have the ability to measure weapon
> grade nuclear material. We can rest assured a half dozen
> agencies have noticed this thread.
I bet that's an interesting one to justify at budget time, even if they
get it down to half a dozen people.
"Well the section investigated some fifty mentions of nuclear material a
week and, erm, caught nobody, although we did get fifty seven doors
kicked in last year, (costings for repairs to the property of totally
innocent people attached at annex 6)...
Intelligence agencies pay people to get results.
Come up empty and you find yourself doing something less interesting.
Totally screw it up and you'll find yourself checking everyone else's
expenses sheets and finding out where they visited while you sat in the
office doing accounts...
Eugene Griessel
Apr 10, 2012, 2:54:29 PM4/10/12
to
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 19:41:19 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>I just love the idea that they have the time and the manpower.
When you are an idiot brought up on US TV and comics you believe this
sort of thing.
Eugene L Griessel
It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.
wrote:
>I just love the idea that they have the time and the manpower.
sort of thing.
Eugene L Griessel
It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.
Frogwatch
Apr 10, 2012, 3:10:57 PM4/10/12
to
On Apr 10, 2:41 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <yNCdnTksjpdtxhnSnZ2dnUVZ_oydn...@giganews.com>,
For Jonathan:
I really do have a legit interest in measuring such stuff however I do
know that I cannot get any to measure without access to the right govt
agency.
My company has been visited by a certain govt agency regarding sales
to a Mid East nation of our spectrometers, they came by 5 times to
talk about it. I am sure there was no serious way they could have
used the spectrometer for nefarious purposes (it would not have worked
for fissionable materials). I'm sorta happy to know the govt has it's
eyes on such things though.
There are a couple of topics I get nervous searching because I get the
impression that publications on these topics have been discouraged.
Although I have no problem with discouraging publication of things
that are of national security interest, I also think I have a legit
reason to search for any available info on them. Attempting to hide
searches of such would really look suspicious.
Last year, I posted something on what I think would be an easy way to
attack airliners because I hoped the TSA would see it. I'll prob
never know if they did.
> In article <yNCdnTksjpdtxhnSnZ2dnUVZ_oydn...@giganews.com>,
I really do have a legit interest in measuring such stuff however I do
know that I cannot get any to measure without access to the right govt
agency.
My company has been visited by a certain govt agency regarding sales
to a Mid East nation of our spectrometers, they came by 5 times to
talk about it. I am sure there was no serious way they could have
used the spectrometer for nefarious purposes (it would not have worked
for fissionable materials). I'm sorta happy to know the govt has it's
eyes on such things though.
There are a couple of topics I get nervous searching because I get the
impression that publications on these topics have been discouraged.
Although I have no problem with discouraging publication of things
that are of national security interest, I also think I have a legit
reason to search for any available info on them. Attempting to hide
searches of such would really look suspicious.
Last year, I posted something on what I think would be an easy way to
attack airliners because I hoped the TSA would see it. I'll prob
never know if they did.
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 5:10:03 PM4/10/12
to
news:5be22e55-578c-4a4e...@k4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>For Jonathan:
>I really do have a legit interest in measuring such stuff however I do
>know that I cannot get any to measure without access to the right govt
>agency.
>My company has been visited by a certain govt agency regarding sales
>to a Mid East nation of our spectrometers, they came by 5 times to
>talk about it.
Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
much every keyword intelligence communities would
care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
>I am sure there was no serious way they could have
>used the spectrometer for nefarious purposes (it would not have worked
>for fissionable materials). I'm sorta happy to know the govt has it's
>eyes on such things though.
Same here.
>There are a couple of topics I get nervous searching because I get the
>impression that publications on these topics have been discouraged.
>Although I have no problem with discouraging publication of things
>that are of national security interest, I also think I have a legit
>reason to search for any available info on them. Attempting to hide
>searches of such would really look suspicious.
If some site is known to supply information which can be
used for terrorism, be assured everyone that clicks in
will be noticed, many of those sites are honey pots.
But if your motives are pure don't worry about it.
> Last year, I posted something on what I think would be an easy way to
>attack airliners because I hoped the TSA would see it. I'll prob
>never know if they did.
Have you tried flying lately?
s
>For Jonathan:
>I really do have a legit interest in measuring such stuff however I do
>know that I cannot get any to measure without access to the right govt
>agency.
>My company has been visited by a certain govt agency regarding sales
>to a Mid East nation of our spectrometers, they came by 5 times to
>talk about it.
if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
much every keyword intelligence communities would
care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
>I am sure there was no serious way they could have
>used the spectrometer for nefarious purposes (it would not have worked
>for fissionable materials). I'm sorta happy to know the govt has it's
>eyes on such things though.
>There are a couple of topics I get nervous searching because I get the
>impression that publications on these topics have been discouraged.
>Although I have no problem with discouraging publication of things
>that are of national security interest, I also think I have a legit
>reason to search for any available info on them. Attempting to hide
>searches of such would really look suspicious.
used for terrorism, be assured everyone that clicks in
will be noticed, many of those sites are honey pots.
But if your motives are pure don't worry about it.
> Last year, I posted something on what I think would be an easy way to
>attack airliners because I hoped the TSA would see it. I'll prob
>never know if they did.
s
Keith W
Apr 10, 2012, 5:26:50 PM4/10/12
to
in that direction which given the renewed interest in nuclear power
may be a smart move.
>
>> What you can sign up for courses
>> on the subject
>
> Do the courses provide weapons grade
> nuclear material to 'play' around with?
a degree of familiarization is rather desirable
> Words should mean something, I'm
> simply taking him at his word. I asked
> him twice why he shouldn't be reported
> for what he said, and he didn't reply.
>
> Don't you find that curious? If he doesn't
> care then no harm done if someone
> reports him.
>
>
> Jonathan
>
Keith
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 5:29:54 PM4/10/12
to
In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
> much every keyword intelligence communities would
> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
A child certainly could.
However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
word' of some kind.
Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
wr...@gmail.com says...
> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
> much every keyword intelligence communities would
> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
word' of some kind.
Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
Frogwatch
Apr 10, 2012, 9:15:25 PM4/10/12
to
On Apr 10, 5:29 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnSnZ2dnUVZ_jedn...@giganews.com>,
I've tried not to fly over the last few years but this year, I have
flown quite a bit and have not seen any of the TSA horror stories you
hear about. Of course, no TSA guy is interested in looking at middle
aged guy for longer than necessary.
The 5 visits by the "authorities" was probably due to the company in
the ME paying their bill. I assume that a large amount of money
coming from a ME country would attract attention so I doubt it had
anything to do with the internet and my searches.
Although searches containing the right combo of "hit words" might
attract attention, my general feeling is that attempting to hide such
searches would attract even more. I really do think I have legit
reasons for searching topics that might trigger some attention but I
wonder about people who are motivated by simple curiosity. If someone
has no real reason for wanting to know about "stuff", I wonder how
likely it would be for him to get on a "list". Maybe we ought to go
back and see that movie "Brazil" as a cautionary tale.
> In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnSnZ2dnUVZ_jedn...@giganews.com>,
flown quite a bit and have not seen any of the TSA horror stories you
hear about. Of course, no TSA guy is interested in looking at middle
aged guy for longer than necessary.
The 5 visits by the "authorities" was probably due to the company in
the ME paying their bill. I assume that a large amount of money
coming from a ME country would attract attention so I doubt it had
anything to do with the internet and my searches.
Although searches containing the right combo of "hit words" might
attract attention, my general feeling is that attempting to hide such
searches would attract even more. I really do think I have legit
reasons for searching topics that might trigger some attention but I
wonder about people who are motivated by simple curiosity. If someone
has no real reason for wanting to know about "stuff", I wonder how
likely it would be for him to get on a "list". Maybe we ought to go
back and see that movie "Brazil" as a cautionary tale.
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 9:19:58 PM4/10/12
to
news:MPG.29eeb6b0a...@news.eternal-september.org...
related topics? A few dozen with any traffic maybe?
Net cops are all over the place, especially in chat rooms and
social media.
"The United States spent $75 billion over the past year to finance
worldwide intelligence operations that employ 200,000 people,"
"He said he announced the total figure for all 16 civilian and military
intelligence agencies for the past year "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/16/AR2009091603208.html
> In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnS...@giganews.com>,
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
>> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
>> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
>> much every keyword intelligence communities would
>> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
>
> A child certainly could.
>
> However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
> word' of some kind.
>
> Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
> than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
How many ng's are there about military and other security
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
>> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
>> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
>> much every keyword intelligence communities would
>> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
>
> A child certainly could.
>
> However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
> word' of some kind.
>
> Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
> than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
related topics? A few dozen with any traffic maybe?
Net cops are all over the place, especially in chat rooms and
social media.
"The United States spent $75 billion over the past year to finance
worldwide intelligence operations that employ 200,000 people,"
"He said he announced the total figure for all 16 civilian and military
intelligence agencies for the past year "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/16/AR2009091603208.html
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 9:38:56 PM4/10/12
to
In article <58ce82a2-3277-4fa2-8bb1-
21456f...@y13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, ohar...@mindspring.com
says...
but that's about all.
It's one reason I no longer visit the USA for pleasure.
> The 5 visits by the "authorities" was probably due to the company in
> the ME paying their bill. I assume that a large amount of money
> coming from a ME country would attract attention so I doubt it had
> anything to do with the internet and my searches.
I doubt it, unless you're doing an 'arms deal' levels of transaction.
The terrorists have other ways of buying their toys.
I understand that they use charities as fronts a lot of the time.
> Although searches containing the right combo of "hit words" might
> attract attention, my general feeling is that attempting to hide such
> searches would attract even more.
I think you grant the authorities too much money and the bad guys not
enough sophistication.
The terrorists attacking India a couple of years ago used IP based
communications via a US service provider.
A virtual world system like 'Second Life' gives them access to secure
'chat' facilities and also allows the transfer of files.
Skype gives then secure speech.
Why bother using Usenet 'in clear'?
Now harassing innocents because a trial looks good is something the
British authorities did for a time, but a succession of cases came
unglued because the people involved were charged with 'Being innocent
but Muslim, and with a big scary beard' and the fuss was such that
they've just about dropped them.
I await with interest the results of the kangaroo courts on Cuba.
If the US has any sense most of the defendants will be sentenced to
'time served' and put on the first flight home, wherever 'home' is.
21456f...@y13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, ohar...@mindspring.com
says...
>
> On Apr 10, 5:29 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnSnZ2dnUVZ_jedn...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >
> > > Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
> > > if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
> > > don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
> > > much every keyword intelligence communities would
> > > care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
> >
> > A child certainly could.
> >
> > However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
> > word' of some kind.
> >
> > Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
> > than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
> >
> > --
> > William Black
> >
> > When you hear the words 'Our people are our greatest asset' then it's
> > time to leave.
>
> I've tried not to fly over the last few years but this year, I have
> flown quite a bit and have not seen any of the TSA horror stories you
> hear about. Of course, no TSA guy is interested in looking at middle
> aged guy for longer than necessary.
The TSA is driving tourists away and driving people away from flying,
> On Apr 10, 5:29 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnSnZ2dnUVZ_jedn...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >
> > > Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
> > > if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
> > > don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
> > > much every keyword intelligence communities would
> > > care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
> >
> > A child certainly could.
> >
> > However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
> > word' of some kind.
> >
> > Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
> > than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
> >
> > --
> > William Black
> >
> > When you hear the words 'Our people are our greatest asset' then it's
> > time to leave.
>
> I've tried not to fly over the last few years but this year, I have
> flown quite a bit and have not seen any of the TSA horror stories you
> hear about. Of course, no TSA guy is interested in looking at middle
> aged guy for longer than necessary.
but that's about all.
It's one reason I no longer visit the USA for pleasure.
> The 5 visits by the "authorities" was probably due to the company in
> the ME paying their bill. I assume that a large amount of money
> coming from a ME country would attract attention so I doubt it had
> anything to do with the internet and my searches.
The terrorists have other ways of buying their toys.
I understand that they use charities as fronts a lot of the time.
> Although searches containing the right combo of "hit words" might
> attract attention, my general feeling is that attempting to hide such
> searches would attract even more.
enough sophistication.
The terrorists attacking India a couple of years ago used IP based
communications via a US service provider.
A virtual world system like 'Second Life' gives them access to secure
'chat' facilities and also allows the transfer of files.
Skype gives then secure speech.
Why bother using Usenet 'in clear'?
Now harassing innocents because a trial looks good is something the
British authorities did for a time, but a succession of cases came
unglued because the people involved were charged with 'Being innocent
but Muslim, and with a big scary beard' and the fuss was such that
they've just about dropped them.
I await with interest the results of the kangaroo courts on Cuba.
If the US has any sense most of the defendants will be sentenced to
'time served' and put on the first flight home, wherever 'home' is.
Bill
Apr 10, 2012, 9:42:42 PM4/10/12
to
In article <dM6dnR5mlLzxQRnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
Or do you really think they're that stupid?
> "The United States spent $75 billion over the past year to finance
> worldwide intelligence operations that employ 200,000 people,"
And all of them have to show some sort of results to justify their
continued existence.
Tell me about the terrorists caught because Usenet betrayed them.
wr...@gmail.com says...
>
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29eeb6b0a...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
> >> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
> >> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
> >> much every keyword intelligence communities would
> >> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
> >
> > A child certainly could.
> >
> > However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
> > word' of some kind.
> >
>
> > Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
> > than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
>
>
> How many ng's are there about military and other security
> related topics? A few dozen with any traffic maybe?
> Net cops are all over the place, especially in chat rooms and
> social media.
How many terrorists use them?
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29eeb6b0a...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
> >> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
> >> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
> >> much every keyword intelligence communities would
> >> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
> >
> > A child certainly could.
> >
> > However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
> > word' of some kind.
> >
>
> > Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money on
> > than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
>
>
> How many ng's are there about military and other security
> related topics? A few dozen with any traffic maybe?
> Net cops are all over the place, especially in chat rooms and
> social media.
Or do you really think they're that stupid?
> "The United States spent $75 billion over the past year to finance
> worldwide intelligence operations that employ 200,000 people,"
continued existence.
Tell me about the terrorists caught because Usenet betrayed them.
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 9:57:37 PM4/10/12
to
news:xA1hr.7440$M21....@fx31.am4...
>>
>
> Go ahead
Not needed.
He's mentioned, let's see....
bomb grade nuclear material, attacking airlines, selling
sensitive equipment to Middle Eastern countries, being
visited 5 times by security agents, nuclear weapons faq,
watch lists, hiding internet searches, radiation detectors
pico ammeters, nitrogen explosives, peroxide explosives
poison gasses, India, Pakistan, high energy radiation,
spectrometers and the TSA.
....just in this thread
There's a 100% chance he's either trolling for cops
or a cop that's trolling.
>
> Keith
>
>>
>
> Go ahead
Not needed.
He's mentioned, let's see....
bomb grade nuclear material, attacking airlines, selling
sensitive equipment to Middle Eastern countries, being
visited 5 times by security agents, nuclear weapons faq,
watch lists, hiding internet searches, radiation detectors
pico ammeters, nitrogen explosives, peroxide explosives
poison gasses, India, Pakistan, high energy radiation,
spectrometers and the TSA.
....just in this thread
There's a 100% chance he's either trolling for cops
or a cop that's trolling.
>
> Keith
>
jonathan
Apr 10, 2012, 10:12:20 PM4/10/12
to
news:MPG.29eef1e43...@news.eternal-september.org...
"Sixty percent of people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities
between January 2009 and April 2011 were American citizens,
according to a new report from Rice University's Baker Institute
for Public Policy."
"Of the 29 persons with no known association to a group, 11 had
been active on terrorist-related chat rooms and websites.
* Overall, 38 percent had been involved in this Internet activity."
"The Internet and prison conversion are the two biggest new trends
that policymakers need to look at more closely," Neuhaus Schaan
said. "We've seen a major change in how people become
associated with extremist groups in the past 20 years, and we
need to adapt."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2808771/posts
> In article <dM6dnR5mlLzxQRnS...@giganews.com>,
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.29eeb6b0a...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> > In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnS...@giganews.com>,
>> > wr...@gmail.com says...
>> >
>> >
>> >> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
>> >> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
>> >> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
>> >> much every keyword intelligence communities would
>> >> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
>> >
>> > A child certainly could.
>> >
>> > However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
>> > word' of some kind.
>> >
>>
>> > Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money
>> > on
>> > than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
>>
>>
>> How many ng's are there about military and other security
>> related topics? A few dozen with any traffic maybe?
>> Net cops are all over the place, especially in chat rooms and
>> social media.
>
> How many terrorists use them?
>
> Or do you really think they're that stupid?
Yep!
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.29eeb6b0a...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> > In article <zJKdnRWa0s4gPBnS...@giganews.com>,
>> > wr...@gmail.com says...
>> >
>> >
>> >> Thanks for replying. If you've been visited then asking
>> >> if you're probably being watched is a pretty moot point
>> >> don't you think? Just in this thread you've mentioned pretty
>> >> much every keyword intelligence communities would
>> >> care about, and a child can word-search usenet.
>> >
>> > A child certainly could.
>> >
>> > However it would take an army to red every post that contained a 'hit
>> > word' of some kind.
>> >
>>
>> > Intelligence services seem to have better things to spend their money
>> > on
>> > than trawling Usenet for possible terrorists.
>>
>>
>> How many ng's are there about military and other security
>> related topics? A few dozen with any traffic maybe?
>> Net cops are all over the place, especially in chat rooms and
>> social media.
>
> How many terrorists use them?
>
> Or do you really think they're that stupid?
"Sixty percent of people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities
between January 2009 and April 2011 were American citizens,
according to a new report from Rice University's Baker Institute
for Public Policy."
"Of the 29 persons with no known association to a group, 11 had
been active on terrorist-related chat rooms and websites.
* Overall, 38 percent had been involved in this Internet activity."
"The Internet and prison conversion are the two biggest new trends
that policymakers need to look at more closely," Neuhaus Schaan
said. "We've seen a major change in how people become
associated with extremist groups in the past 20 years, and we
need to adapt."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2808771/posts
Gernot Hassenpflug
Apr 10, 2012, 10:25:05 PM4/10/12
to
> news:MPG.29ee4d2df...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>
> >> > We discussed high energy radiation
> >> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> >> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> >> > weapons materials.
> >>
> >>
> >> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
> >> be reported for this statement?
> >
> > Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>
>
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
>
> > In article <IMydnWObnZGjoRnS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> "Frogwatch" <ohar...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >> news:9fa32621-1943-446a...@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>
> >> > We discussed high energy radiation
> >> > (gammas) and I mentioned I was interested in measuring stuff in spent
> >> > nuke fuels and other nukish stuff including things involving possible
> >> > weapons materials.
> >>
> >>
> >> You never answered my question, why shouldn't you
> >> be reported for this statement?
> >
> > Because he shows no intent to break any laws.
>
>
> He stated he's...interested in measuring weapons grade
> nuclear material, please explain to me how he could
> legally be in the same room with such material?
>
> If he doesn't explain how, and to my satisfaction, I'm most
> certainly forwarding a tip to the FBI. That post is either...
>
> 1) From an internet loon, and idle chat
> 2) From a potential criminal of the worst kind
>
> 1) From an internet loon, and idle chat
> 3) From an undercover agent trolling for terrorists
>
> In any of those, better safe then sorry
>
> https://tips.fbi.gov/
There are none so enslaved as those who believe they are free....
--
Gernot Hassenpflug
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Keith W
Apr 11, 2012, 3:29:09 AM4/11/12
to
> "The Internet and prison conversion are the two biggest new trends
> that policymakers need to look at more closely," Neuhaus Schaan
> said. "We've seen a major change in how people become
> associated with extremist groups in the past 20 years, and we
> need to adapt."
>
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2808771/posts
>
Keith
Keith W
Apr 11, 2012, 3:30:25 AM4/11/12
to
jonathan wrote:
> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:xA1hr.7440$M21....@fx31.am4...
>
>>>
>>
>> Go ahead
>
>
> Not needed.
>
> He's mentioned, let's see....
>
> bomb grade nuclear material, attacking airlines, selling
> sensitive equipment to Middle Eastern countries, being
> visited 5 times by security agents, nuclear weapons faq,
> watch lists, hiding internet searches, radiation detectors
> pico ammeters, nitrogen explosives, peroxide explosives
> poison gasses, India, Pakistan, high energy radiation,
> spectrometers and the TSA.
>
> ....just in this thread
>
As have you , welcome to the watch list.
> "Keith W" <keithnosp...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:xA1hr.7440$M21....@fx31.am4...
>
>>>
>>
>> Go ahead
>
>
> Not needed.
>
> He's mentioned, let's see....
>
> bomb grade nuclear material, attacking airlines, selling
> sensitive equipment to Middle Eastern countries, being
> visited 5 times by security agents, nuclear weapons faq,
> watch lists, hiding internet searches, radiation detectors
> pico ammeters, nitrogen explosives, peroxide explosives
> poison gasses, India, Pakistan, high energy radiation,
> spectrometers and the TSA.
>
> ....just in this thread
>
Keith
Bill
Apr 11, 2012, 6:34:16 AM4/11/12
to
In article <98CdneM8vsmjeBnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
The ...visited 5 times by security agents... makes that almost an
impossibility.
They might give the file a spin.
But he's obviously been in contact with the appropriate authorities.
Finding out his identity isn't simple, which means it isn't cheap...
wr...@gmail.com says...
impossibility.
They might give the file a spin.
But he's obviously been in contact with the appropriate authorities.
Finding out his identity isn't simple, which means it isn't cheap...
Bill
Apr 11, 2012, 6:35:56 AM4/11/12
to
In article <PJSdnSRmO7sxdRnS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
How many have been convicted?
Because all you're describing harassment of the people daft enough to
look.
wr...@gmail.com says...
>
> "Sixty percent of people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities
> between January 2009 and April 2011 were American citizens,
> according to a new report from Rice University's Baker Institute
> for Public Policy."
>
> "Of the 29 persons with no known association to a group, 11 had
> been active on terrorist-related chat rooms and websites.
> * Overall, 38 percent had been involved in this Internet activity."
>
I love the 'weasel words'.
> "Sixty percent of people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities
> between January 2009 and April 2011 were American citizens,
> according to a new report from Rice University's Baker Institute
> for Public Policy."
>
> "Of the 29 persons with no known association to a group, 11 had
> been active on terrorist-related chat rooms and websites.
> * Overall, 38 percent had been involved in this Internet activity."
>
How many have been convicted?
Because all you're describing harassment of the people daft enough to
look.
jonathan
Apr 11, 2012, 9:21:51 AM4/11/12
to
news:pqahr.20020$Tg1....@fx30.am4...
>
> As have you , welcome to the watch list.
>
That ship probably sailed long ago~
> Keith
>
>
> As have you , welcome to the watch list.
>
> Keith
>
jonathan
Apr 11, 2012, 9:28:30 AM4/11/12
to
news:MPG.29ef6e82...@news.eternal-september.org...
> The ...visited 5 times by security agents... makes that almost an
> impossibility.
>
> They might give the file a spin.
>
> But he's obviously been in contact with the appropriate authorities.
>
> Finding out his identity isn't simple, which means it isn't cheap...
You have to admit the whole thread is kinda bizarre.
> The ...visited 5 times by security agents... makes that almost an
> impossibility.
>
> They might give the file a spin.
>
> But he's obviously been in contact with the appropriate authorities.
>
> Finding out his identity isn't simple, which means it isn't cheap...
Message has been deleted
Frogwatch
Apr 11, 2012, 12:07:46 PM4/11/12
to
On Apr 11, 10:34 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Bill" <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> always the case on any thread you get involved in.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Anybody who has been on smn for any length of time knows my actual
name (David OHara)
AS far as all of the "bad words" I discuss, it's simply a matter of
being interested in everything and an expert at none.
Having the authorities visit my business I am convinced was simply
over the payment of a large amount of money to us by what they said
was a questionable business in the ME and not due to my arcane
interests.
If I am on some sort of watch list, it has never caused me any
problems and I suspect I bore any watchers to death as I am obviously
just a benign middle aged geek.
OTOH, there are people who might have problems being put on such lists
such as my associate who was trying to sell me the radiation detector
(I initiated it) because he is from the SW Asia area and being put on
a "no-fly" list would kill his career. There are probably even
Americans who have good reasons to fear being put on a no-fly list or
similar list as this would hurt their careers.
So, the conversation that interests me is to what extent people limit
their internet searches for fear of such. Do you limit your searches
for fear of such listing?
> "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Bill" <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:MPG.29ef6e82...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> >> The ...visited 5 times by security agents... makes that almost an
> >> impossibility.
>
> >> They might give the file a spin.
>
> >> But he's obviously been in contact with the appropriate authorities.
>
> >> Finding out his identity isn't simple, which means it isn't cheap...
>
> >You have to admit the whole thread is kinda bizarre.
>
> That's frequently the case in threads involving Froggy and virtually
>
> >> The ...visited 5 times by security agents... makes that almost an
> >> impossibility.
>
> >> They might give the file a spin.
>
> >> But he's obviously been in contact with the appropriate authorities.
>
> >> Finding out his identity isn't simple, which means it isn't cheap...
>
> >You have to admit the whole thread is kinda bizarre.
>
> always the case on any thread you get involved in.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Anybody who has been on smn for any length of time knows my actual
name (David OHara)
AS far as all of the "bad words" I discuss, it's simply a matter of
being interested in everything and an expert at none.
Having the authorities visit my business I am convinced was simply
over the payment of a large amount of money to us by what they said
was a questionable business in the ME and not due to my arcane
interests.
If I am on some sort of watch list, it has never caused me any
problems and I suspect I bore any watchers to death as I am obviously
just a benign middle aged geek.
OTOH, there are people who might have problems being put on such lists
such as my associate who was trying to sell me the radiation detector
(I initiated it) because he is from the SW Asia area and being put on
a "no-fly" list would kill his career. There are probably even
Americans who have good reasons to fear being put on a no-fly list or
similar list as this would hurt their careers.
So, the conversation that interests me is to what extent people limit
their internet searches for fear of such. Do you limit your searches
for fear of such listing?
Bill
Apr 11, 2012, 12:34:15 PM4/11/12
to
In article <916777b5-814d-40a7-b826-e2184ba8b5f5@
36g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, ohar...@mindspring.com says...
as it would effectively deny them entry into their homeland.
A 'No Fly' list is just about impossible to implement in any meaningful
way as long as there are people who don't need a visa to get an an
aeroplane to that country.
So in reality it's just another way to stop people doing business with
shady characters.
36g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, ohar...@mindspring.com says...
>
There are probably even
> Americans who have good reasons to fear being put on a no-fly list or
> similar list as this would hurt their careers.
I don't think you could put a US Citizen on a US 'no fly' list
There are probably even
> Americans who have good reasons to fear being put on a no-fly list or
> similar list as this would hurt their careers.
as it would effectively deny them entry into their homeland.
A 'No Fly' list is just about impossible to implement in any meaningful
way as long as there are people who don't need a visa to get an an
aeroplane to that country.
So in reality it's just another way to stop people doing business with
shady characters.
jonathan
Apr 11, 2012, 4:27:59 PM4/11/12
to
news:916777b5-814d-40a7...@36g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
Anybody who has been on smn for any length of time knows my actual
name (David OHara)
AS far as all of the "bad words" I discuss, it's simply a matter of
being interested in everything and an expert at none.
Having the authorities visit my business I am convinced was simply
over the payment of a large amount of money to us by what they said
was a questionable business in the ME and not due to my arcane
interests.
If I am on some sort of watch list, it has never caused me any
problems and I suspect I bore any watchers to death as I am obviously
just a benign middle aged geek.
OTOH, there are people who might have problems being put on such lists
such as my associate who was trying to sell me the radiation detector
(I initiated it) because he is from the SW Asia area and being put on
a "no-fly" list would kill his career. There are probably even
Americans who have good reasons to fear being put on a no-fly list or
similar list as this would hurt their careers.
So, the conversation that interests me is to what extent people limit
their internet searches for fear of such. Do you limit your searches
for fear of such listing?
.............................
Well ya, if I think some site has information that's easily used
for sinister purposes, I think twice before fishing around.
I just put myself in the shoes of agencies trying to catch the
bad guys. Operating a website that has all kinds of dual
use information might attract the bad guys, and once
they click in their identity becomes much easier to trace
and get on some list, or a half dozen lists for that matter.
As many have pointed out, it's a lot more work to go out
and sift through the massive amounts of chat. It's much
easier to set a trap in some website.
Honeypot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_(computing)
But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
innocent people don't have much to fear. My point is
that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
to travel. A little caution on the Internet these days
is certainly justified.
And probably the easiest way to avoid unjustified
problems via Internet use is to post your real name
and especially email address. That just opens you
up to any wannabe hackers or angry loons.
You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
I think most people would be surprised how easy it is
to find out where people live and work and all that
once a real name and email address is known.
Who needs some angry fool making trouble at work
and so on?
For instance, I've got this Fred fellow stalking me around
wherever I go right now, if he knew my real name who
knows what he might do?
s
Anybody who has been on smn for any length of time knows my actual
name (David OHara)
AS far as all of the "bad words" I discuss, it's simply a matter of
being interested in everything and an expert at none.
Having the authorities visit my business I am convinced was simply
over the payment of a large amount of money to us by what they said
was a questionable business in the ME and not due to my arcane
interests.
If I am on some sort of watch list, it has never caused me any
problems and I suspect I bore any watchers to death as I am obviously
just a benign middle aged geek.
OTOH, there are people who might have problems being put on such lists
such as my associate who was trying to sell me the radiation detector
(I initiated it) because he is from the SW Asia area and being put on
a "no-fly" list would kill his career. There are probably even
Americans who have good reasons to fear being put on a no-fly list or
similar list as this would hurt their careers.
So, the conversation that interests me is to what extent people limit
their internet searches for fear of such. Do you limit your searches
for fear of such listing?
Well ya, if I think some site has information that's easily used
for sinister purposes, I think twice before fishing around.
I just put myself in the shoes of agencies trying to catch the
bad guys. Operating a website that has all kinds of dual
use information might attract the bad guys, and once
they click in their identity becomes much easier to trace
and get on some list, or a half dozen lists for that matter.
As many have pointed out, it's a lot more work to go out
and sift through the massive amounts of chat. It's much
easier to set a trap in some website.
Honeypot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_(computing)
But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
innocent people don't have much to fear. My point is
that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
to travel. A little caution on the Internet these days
is certainly justified.
And probably the easiest way to avoid unjustified
problems via Internet use is to post your real name
and especially email address. That just opens you
up to any wannabe hackers or angry loons.
You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
I think most people would be surprised how easy it is
to find out where people live and work and all that
once a real name and email address is known.
Who needs some angry fool making trouble at work
and so on?
For instance, I've got this Fred fellow stalking me around
wherever I go right now, if he knew my real name who
knows what he might do?
s
Bill
Apr 11, 2012, 4:49:35 PM4/11/12
to
In article <VbCdnYQJ_fIldBjS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
> innocent people don't have much to fear.
Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government of
the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
proved.
My point is
> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
> to travel.
Why?
> And probably the easiest way to avoid unjustified
> problems via Internet use is to post your real name
> and especially email address. That just opens you
> up to any wannabe hackers or angry loons.
Not that I've found.
> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
wr...@gmail.com says...
> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
> innocent people don't have much to fear.
the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government of
the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
proved.
My point is
> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
> to travel.
> And probably the easiest way to avoid unjustified
> problems via Internet use is to post your real name
> and especially email address. That just opens you
> up to any wannabe hackers or angry loons.
> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
Frogwatch
Apr 11, 2012, 4:51:04 PM4/11/12
to
On Apr 11, 4:27 pm, "jonathan" <wr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Frogwatch" <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> Honeypothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypot_(computing)
someone (your stalker ) has even less of a life.
> "Frogwatch" <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>
> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
> innocent people don't have much to fear. My point is
> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
> to travel. A little caution on the Internet these days
> is certainly justified.
>
> And probably the easiest way to avoid unjustified
> problems via Internet use is to post your real name
> and especially email address. That just opens you
> up to any wannabe hackers or angry loons.
>
> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
>
> I think most people would be surprised how easy it is
> to find out where people live and work and all that
> once a real name and email address is known.
> Who needs some angry fool making trouble at work
> and so on?
>
> For instance, I've got this Fred fellow stalking me around
> wherever I go right now, if he knew my real name who
> knows what he might do?
>
> s
Do like I do and be boring and then you will know that at least
> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
> innocent people don't have much to fear. My point is
> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
> to travel. A little caution on the Internet these days
> is certainly justified.
>
> And probably the easiest way to avoid unjustified
> problems via Internet use is to post your real name
> and especially email address. That just opens you
> up to any wannabe hackers or angry loons.
>
> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
>
> I think most people would be surprised how easy it is
> to find out where people live and work and all that
> once a real name and email address is known.
> Who needs some angry fool making trouble at work
> and so on?
>
> For instance, I've got this Fred fellow stalking me around
> wherever I go right now, if he knew my real name who
> knows what he might do?
>
> s
someone (your stalker ) has even less of a life.
jonathan
Apr 11, 2012, 7:19:35 PM4/11/12
to
news:MPG.29effe912...@news.eternal-september.org...
At least in comparison to other western countries.
>
> My point is
>> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
>> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
>> to travel.
>
Anonymity tends to tick people off though. I should be able
to say what I like without worrying about retaliation.
Wanting to know the source is more about control
than anything else imo, since I think words should stand
on their own merits.
> In article <VbCdnYQJ_fIldBjS...@giganews.com>,
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
>> innocent people don't have much to fear.
>
> Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
> the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government of
> the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
> hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
> proved.
I think the UK isn't all that far from being a police state.
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
>> innocent people don't have much to fear.
>
> Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
> the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government of
> the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
> hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
> proved.
At least in comparison to other western countries.
>
> My point is
>> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
>> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
>> to travel.
>
>> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
>
> No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
I think being anonymous allows a great deal of honesty.
>
> No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
Anonymity tends to tick people off though. I should be able
to say what I like without worrying about retaliation.
Wanting to know the source is more about control
than anything else imo, since I think words should stand
on their own merits.
jonathan
Apr 11, 2012, 7:23:54 PM4/11/12
to
news:259cc717-1369-4fbb...@z17g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
>Do like I do and be boring and then you will know that at least
>someone (your stalker ) has even less of a life.
I'm plenty boring enough in real life, the Internet allows
a level of freedom not possible in real life. Being anon
allows me to be unrestrained and not having to worry
about ticking someone off. If I 'blow it' with this handle
I can always start over from scratch~
Ever see the movie Groundhog Day with Bill Murray?
We should all have the opportunity to have do-overs
until we get it right.
s
>Do like I do and be boring and then you will know that at least
>someone (your stalker ) has even less of a life.
a level of freedom not possible in real life. Being anon
allows me to be unrestrained and not having to worry
about ticking someone off. If I 'blow it' with this handle
I can always start over from scratch~
Ever see the movie Groundhog Day with Bill Murray?
We should all have the opportunity to have do-overs
until we get it right.
s
Bill
Apr 11, 2012, 8:03:12 PM4/11/12
to
In article <6O6dnWUQIo5KjBvS...@giganews.com>,
wr...@gmail.com says...
Jury trials?
Freedom of speech?
Freedom to do business?
Freedom of movement?
Freedom of association?
Or are you just another gun nut?
> > My point is
> >> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
> >> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
> >> to travel.
>
> >
> >> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
> >
> > No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
>
>
> I think being anonymous allows a great deal of honesty.
No, it just allows wing-nuts to tell lies with impunity.
> Anonymity tends to tick people off though. I should be able
> to say what I like without worrying about retaliation.
I can.
That's because I'm honest about what I say.
wr...@gmail.com says...
>
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29effe912...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <VbCdnYQJ_fIldBjS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
> >> innocent people don't have much to fear.
> >
> > Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
> > the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government of
> > the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
> > hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
> > proved.
>
>
> I think the UK isn't all that far from being a police state.
> At least in comparison to other western countries.
In what sense?
> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.29effe912...@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In article <VbCdnYQJ_fIldBjS...@giganews.com>,
> > wr...@gmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
> >> innocent people don't have much to fear.
> >
> > Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
> > the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government of
> > the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
> > hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
> > proved.
>
>
> I think the UK isn't all that far from being a police state.
> At least in comparison to other western countries.
Jury trials?
Freedom of speech?
Freedom to do business?
Freedom of movement?
Freedom of association?
Or are you just another gun nut?
> > My point is
> >> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
> >> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
> >> to travel.
>
> >
> >> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
> >
> > No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
>
>
> I think being anonymous allows a great deal of honesty.
> Anonymity tends to tick people off though. I should be able
> to say what I like without worrying about retaliation.
That's because I'm honest about what I say.
Dan
Apr 11, 2012, 9:21:41 PM4/11/12
to
On 4/9/2012 11:21 AM, Eugene Griessel wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill<black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>
> Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
>
> Eugene L Griessel
>
> Let's have real democracy. An annual plebiscite to determine
> politicians wages.
Jeez, even I can write a better/faster sorting algorithm than a bubble
sort...
Dan
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:58:56 +0100, Bill<black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You throw headers at a huge bubble sort program
>
> Bubble sort? Huh? You are way behind the times.
>
> Eugene L Griessel
>
> Let's have real democracy. An annual plebiscite to determine
> politicians wages.
Jeez, even I can write a better/faster sorting algorithm than a bubble
sort...
Dan
jonathan
Apr 11, 2012, 10:41:58 PM4/11/12
to
news:MPG.29f02c1f...@news.eternal-september.org...
agreeing with you, but reading closer I
see your statement above was a back-handed
slap at the US govt. Sorry for misreading.
>
> Jury trials?
>
> Freedom of speech?
>
> Freedom to do business?
>
> Freedom of movement?
>
> Freedom of association?
Well ya, most of the above. The laws on encryption
and guns, and Ireland for example.
>
> Or are you just another gun nut?
I'm a treehugger~ I would only seem
right wing to ah...eh hum...socialist.
>
>> > My point is
>> >> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
>> >> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
>> >> to travel.
>>
>> >
>> >> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
>> >
>> > No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
>>
>>
>> I think being anonymous allows a great deal of honesty.
>
> No, it just allows wing-nuts to tell lies with impunity.
That too. But sometimes people use anonymity for
more honorable purposes.
>
>> Anonymity tends to tick people off though. I should be able
>> to say what I like without worrying about retaliation.
>
> I can.
>
> That's because I'm honest about what I say.
>
What am I lying about?
> In article <6O6dnWUQIo5KjBvS...@giganews.com>,
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.29effe912...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> > In article <VbCdnYQJ_fIldBjS...@giganews.com>,
>> > wr...@gmail.com says...
>> >
>> >
>> >> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
>> >> innocent people don't have much to fear.
>> >
>> > Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
>> > the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government
>> > of
>> > the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
>> > hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
>> > proved.
>>
>>
>> I think the UK isn't all that far from being a police state.
>> At least in comparison to other western countries.
>
> In what sense?
Are you from the UK? I thought I was
> wr...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> "Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.29effe912...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> > In article <VbCdnYQJ_fIldBjS...@giganews.com>,
>> > wr...@gmail.com says...
>> >
>> >
>> >> But in the US the various agencies follow the rules, so
>> >> innocent people don't have much to fear.
>> >
>> > Well, except for the Brits kidnapped on US orders and incarcerated in
>> > the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay until the British government
>> > of
>> > the day stirred itself enough to get them out on the grounds that they
>> > hadn't actually done anything, or at least, anything that could be
>> > proved.
>>
>>
>> I think the UK isn't all that far from being a police state.
>> At least in comparison to other western countries.
>
> In what sense?
agreeing with you, but reading closer I
see your statement above was a back-handed
slap at the US govt. Sorry for misreading.
>
> Jury trials?
>
> Freedom of speech?
>
> Freedom to do business?
>
> Freedom of movement?
>
> Freedom of association?
and guns, and Ireland for example.
>
> Or are you just another gun nut?
right wing to ah...eh hum...socialist.
>
>> > My point is
>> >> that an innocent person shouldn't go out and try to
>> >> attract attention or go places where bad guys tend
>> >> to travel.
>>
>> >
>> >> You have to be too nice if you post your real name.<g>
>> >
>> > No, you just have to be reasonably honest in your views.
>>
>>
>> I think being anonymous allows a great deal of honesty.
>
> No, it just allows wing-nuts to tell lies with impunity.
more honorable purposes.
>
>> Anonymity tends to tick people off though. I should be able
>> to say what I like without worrying about retaliation.
>
> I can.
>
> That's because I'm honest about what I say.
>
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Bill
Apr 12, 2012, 6:32:47 AM4/12/12
to
In article <yNqdnQIXuYzO3BvS...@giganews.com>,
Irony has nothing to do with brassy and silky.
The laws on encryption
> and guns, and Ireland for example.
The gun laws are strict but very popular, and we haven't had a school
shooting since, well, the first one.
The encryption laws are essentially non existent and Ireland seems quiet
at the moment.
> > That's because I'm honest about what I say.
> >
>
>
> What am I lying about?
Well, the UK for a start.
The laws on encryption
> and guns, and Ireland for example.
shooting since, well, the first one.
The encryption laws are essentially non existent and Ireland seems quiet
at the moment.
> > That's because I'm honest about what I say.
> >
>
>
> What am I lying about?
0 new messages