Goodbye Barry - Welcome Home AMERICA!

Showing posts with label spying. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spying. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Iran "Captures" U.S. Drone

I have to ask... How and why? How did they get their hands on a U.S. drone aircraft (in one piece) in the first place, and why was it not outfitted with a fail-safe internal or operator remote-control destructive device if these drones are such a big deal? We have the technical capability for either... or both!

The other question that crossed my mind is:
If the RQ-170 Sentinel drone's stealth technology is so relatively unimportant that we don't bother to protect it properly, why the heavy media coverage? Is it truly newsworthy, or is it "much ado about nothing" on an otherwise slow news day? I think the stealth fuselage itself would be worth protecting.

Just curious...

Thursday, September 3, 2009

A New Assault On The First Amendment - Obama Has Your Email Address... and MORE!!

Well, Big Brother strikes again! It has been reported that the National Legal and Policy Center has revealed the White House New Media team is seeking to hire a "technology vendor" to collect data such as comments, tag lines, e-mail, audio and video from any place where the White House "maintains a presence" – for a period of up to eight years.

Which, in my mind anyway, immediately raises the question, "WHY? WHY? and WHY?" The first WHY - Why does the White House need a presence anywhere on the Internet other than at www.whitehouse.gov? The only answer I can come up with is to impose the collection of data by its "technology vendor" (which vendor, I am certain, is tasked to provide all such information to a review and analysis team, so that they may determine who's naughty [disagrees with Obama] and who's nice [agrees with The Messiah), justifying it thusly -

"The contractor shall provide the necessary services to capture, store, extract to approved formats, and transfer content published by EOP (Executive Office of the President) on publicly-accessible web sites, along with information posted by non-EOP persons on publicly-accessible web sites where the EOP offices under PRA (Presidential Records Act) maintains a presence."

The White House will then begin harvesting information about Americans from its pages on popular social networking websites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, YouTube and Flickr.

The second WHY is -Why is paranoia suddenly running rampant in the White House? George W. Bush apparently never felt the need to circumvent/violate the First Amendment by spying on our citizens social correspondence. Nor did Bill Clinton (he was too busy violating his marriage vows to violate anything else).

And the third WHY is - WHY has nobody in the Legislative Branch or Judicial Branch of our government challenged Obama's intrusive and illegal act?

The Presidential Records Act is being abused as an excuse to marginalize our rights under the First and Fourth Amendments! Knowing that our government is spying upon you by harvesting your Internet communications should make you very wary of this administration. It's also an excellent way to intimidate those who might choose this venue to voice their disagreement on certain issues with the current administration.

Even if our communications are highly critical of the administration, it does not make those comments the property of the White House. This makes about as much sense as lug nuts on a cake! There is no acceptable rationale for such an action on the part of the White House. It is plainly an attempt to "do an end-run" around the Constitution, stifle dissent, and to reduce the overwhelming numbers of persons who do not agree with the direction Obama is taking our country, under the guise of keeping Presidential records.

The Legislative and Judicial Branches of government are the guardians of the Constitution. Where is their hue and cry? Where is the public outrage? (Where is Carmen Sandiego... and Waldo?)

There's a very remote possibility that I could be wrong about this situation... we'll just have to see what the future holds.

Friday, June 19, 2009

Census Workers Marking GPS Coordinates of U.S. Homes

I have seen that headline - or one very similar - in several different places over the last few months, but I do not personally know it to be a fact. However, I do believe I may have actually seen a census worker with a hand-held GPS in front of my house a few weeks ago. I can find no other plausible explanation for his actions.

This 'older man' was afoot, holding an object which appeared to be an electronic device (approx 5"x7") in his hands. He paused in front of the house, looked down at the device in his hands and then approached the front door (I can observe the front yard from my computer room window). I was waiting for a knock at the door... which never came. A few seconds later I saw him walking away from the house back into the street, putting an end to this 'close encounter of the weird kind.' The government's excuse for conducting such a census is, "GPS technology allows us to reduce the amount of time spent by census workers in locating addresses while increasing productivity. Most importantly, by adding a GPS coordinate to each housing unit, the Census Bureau is able to ensure that residents are counted in the right location. This is important as the data are used to apportion congressional representation and used to draw redistricting lines.”

Here are a few of the problems I have with anybody GPS'ing my domicile:
1. First and foremost, it seems unnecesarily intrusive. Why does the government need to know the exact coordinates of any individual's living quarters? It smacks of the groundwork for the fabled "Black Ops" - black helicopters and SUV's showing up, and citizens being spirited off in the middle of the night, never to be seen again. But, there's no real proof of "Black Ops" against the citizens of the USA... yet. The U.S. Census Bureau is simply an excuse—a harmless-looking means of obtaining the front door coordinates. The creation of GPS coordinates for front doors has nothing to do with the Census, in all honesty, no matter how much the United States Government tries to convince you that it does.

2. Given that our national security is significantly less-than-bulletproof, at both our physical borders and the 'borders' of our ostensibly secure government computer systems, to what use could this GPS information be put by those who bear us ill will? I can envision a scenario wherein a foreign power hacks into the appropriate government database and retrieves every bit of data needed to pinpoint heavily populated areas as well as the locations of critical utilities. (The only reason I didn't include the locations of sateside military installations in that scenario is that the rest of the hostile/envious world already knows precisely where those bases are located.)

Our government has already overstepped the bounds of the charter of the U.S. Census Bureau, by using them to gather information beyond a simple headcount. Questions like "Do you have running water in your household?", "Do you have insurance?", questions about educational level, number and kinds of disabilities , etc., have no place in the "census". Census is defined thusly:
1: a count of the population and a property evaluation in early Rome
2
: a usually complete enumeration of a population ; specifically : a periodic governmental enumeration of population
3: count, tally

It was designed as a system of "how many"... not a system of "how much"!

Can we afford to forget the scenes of smart bombs and tomahawk missiles, guided by GPS coordinates, going through the windows and doors of buildings during the invasion of Iraq? "That could never happen here.", you say? Ask the Native Americans what they think about that. And do a little research on the "Bonus Army", Washington D.C., 1932 while you're at it - wherein a cavalry charge was led against WWI military veterans by our own 'heroes', General Douglas McArthur and Major George S. Patton.

As Government grows larger, I am reminded of the words of Thomas Paine, who said, ""Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." and Daniel Webster's quote, "There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." And, although often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, the only verifiable attribution for "The best government is that which governs least." is to Henry David Thoreau. They all make sense to me!

I could be wrong about this... I suppose... perhaps... maybe... or maybe not!