Thread: Private intelligence firms?

Originally Posted by TomBlaze

Ok this is getting ridiculous.

I posted this thread a while ago: http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/brea...ce-drones.html

Enter Stratfor:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46555168.../#.T0zne8ytEol

While I am of mixed opinion of Anonymous, I had no idea that there were companies like this so I look forward to reading the material they have provided WikiLeaks. These people can and do spy on American citizens. They are the ones who want to operate drones in our airspace. These people have little to no regulation as to how they operate. It is only matter of time before our whole military structure become corporate-controlled. It seems that there is a corporate version for all 4 branches of the military, intelligence services, prison systems and even law enforcement. How long can we let this go on unabated?

The writing is on the wall, people, but the sad part is that there really isn't much we can do at this point, open rebellion notwithstanding. We are in the tail end of the closing game. Check...mate in 2.

Not to be the pessimist ... but I think America is down a rook, bishop, knight, and Queen ... and mate is inevitable.

We're going to need a lot more tin foil for this thread.

A lot more...

I've always been against the privatization of our military but having an intelligence agency that is funded and controlled by the taxpayer is a good idea. Bringing government out into the open is always a good idea. It's why I favor corporations or companies like wikileaks.

Originally Posted by tsquare

We're going to need a lot more tin foil for this thread.

A lot more...

I hear there's a new brand of tin foil on the market. It's called Wikifoil ... said to transmit information through protective tin foil hats and reveal truth.

Hmmm....I have noticed that people do seem to know more than they should about me. Amazon, Cabelas and Google are pretty good at asking me if I want stuff that I really do want; the grocery store is pretty good about getting me coupons for stuff I buy. On the other hand, the son of a bitch in the car next to me can't seem to figure out that I want to get into his lane even though I've got my blinker on, my horn blaring and my finger out the window.

Originally Posted by lutherf

Hmmm....I have noticed that people do seem to know more than they should about me. Amazon, Cabelas and Google are pretty good at asking me if I want stuff that I really do want; the grocery store is pretty good about getting me coupons for stuff I buy. On the other hand, the son of a bitch in the car next to me can't seem to figure out that I want to get into his lane even though I've got my blinker on, my horn blaring and my finger out the window.

You forgot the two key points to signaling a lane change ... a spat of chaw through your passenger window ... onto the drivers door and start pulling your car into his.

Originally Posted by lutherf

Hmmm....I have noticed that people do seem to know more than they should about me. Amazon, Cabelas and Google are pretty good at asking me if I want stuff that I really do want; the grocery store is pretty good about getting me coupons for stuff I buy. On the other hand, the son of a bitch in the car next to me can't seem to figure out that I want to get into his lane even though I've got my blinker on, my horn blaring and my finger out the window.

In NJ it is safer to not use your blinker when changing lanes as the moment you turn it on, the guy behind you in the lane you wish to get into speeds up so as to not let you in front of him. The other rule is if the average speed on a 65 mph highway is 85, you are safer to do 85 as doing the speed limit greatly increases your chance of getting rear-ended. Sad but true.

Back to the topic at hand, you make a good point about the fact that these companies know far too much about people's private lives so just imagine what these intelligence firms can do seeing as how they are far more invasive. The clock is ticking on our freedom.

Originally Posted by lutherf

Hmmm....I have noticed that people do seem to know more than they should about me. Amazon, Cabelas and Google are pretty good at asking me if I want stuff that I really do want; the grocery store is pretty good about getting me coupons for stuff I buy. On the other hand, the son of a bitch in the car next to me can't seem to figure out that I want to get into his lane even though I've got my blinker on, my horn blaring and my finger out the window.

I'm not all that happy about Google knowing where I shop on-line.

But that is far better than government monitored cameras on ever major street reading your license plates, and following your progress all without a law being passed and all without warrants. And this is a point the 'OMG! we've lost our freedoms!!!' folks refuse... outright REFUSE... to address.

Originally Posted by TomBlaze

In NJ it is safer to not use your blinker when changing lanes as the moment you turn it on, the guy behind you in the lane you wish to get into speeds up so as to not let you in front of him. The other rule is if the average speed on a 65 mph highway is 85, you are safer to do 85 as doing the speed limit greatly increases your chance of getting rear-ended. Sad but true.

Back to the topic at hand, you make a good point about the fact that these companies know far too much about people's private lives so just imagine what these intelligence firms can do seeing as how they are far more invasive. The clock is ticking on our freedom.

Here's the stuff that bothers me -

1. Year after year there are new laws and new regulations which are designed to allow the IRS to better target who gets audited. The problem is that the data is often compiled in such a way that it quite often paints a horribly skewed picture as compared to the reality of the situation. On top of that there are very few options for recourse when the government makes a wrong assessment and acts on it. When dealing with a civilian organization there are many, many more ways of dealing with errors and omissions.

2. An awful lot of data is collected by Federal law enforcement agencies and then shared/combined with data collected at the local level. Furthermore, the risk assessments by Federal authorities seem to regularly be trumping decisions which may well be better made at the local level. This can create very dangerous situations for law abiding citizens.

In short, I really don't have a big problem with the collection of personal data by whoever. I do, however, have some serious concerns about how that data will be used but, overall, my concern isn't how private organizations will use the data as much as how government will use the data.

Originally Posted by tsquare

I'm not all that happy about Google knowing where I shop on-line.

But that is far better than government monitored cameras on ever major street reading your license plates, and following your progress all without a law being passed and all without warrants. And this is a point the 'OMG! we've lost our freedoms!!!' folks refuse... outright REFUSE... to address.

I have to agree with this. The inconsistency of it all is actually quite astounding to say the least. Personally, I don't much like the idea of any entity whether governmental, corporate or supranational entities like the UN knowing my privacy.

Originally Posted by tsquare

I'm not all that happy about Google knowing where I shop on-line.

But that is far better than government monitored cameras on ever major street reading your license plates, and following your progress all without a law being passed and all without warrants. And this is a point the 'OMG! we've lost our freedoms!!!' folks refuse... outright REFUSE... to address.

Who do you think runs those cameras? I bet if you check they are owned, installed and maintained by private companies in most municipalities....even worse than government.

Originally Posted by lutherf

Here's the stuff that bothers me -

1. Year after year there are new laws and new regulations which are designed to allow the IRS to better target who gets audited. The problem is that the data is often compiled in such a way that it quite often paints a horribly skewed picture as compared to the reality of the situation. On top of that there are very few options for recourse when the government makes a wrong assessment and acts on it. When dealing with a civilian organization there are many, many more ways of dealing with errors and omissions.

2. An awful lot of data is collected by Federal law enforcement agencies and then shared/combined with data collected at the local level. Furthermore, the risk assessments by Federal authorities seem to regularly be trumping decisions which may well be better made at the local level. This can create very dangerous situations for law abiding citizens.

In short, I really don't have a big problem with the collection of personal data by whoever. I do, however, have some serious concerns about how that data will be used but, overall, my concern isn't how private organizations will use the data as much as how government will use the data.

It's bad to let either government or private companies do this kind of data mining on individuals. The problem is that these days the two seem to be one in the same. This stuff reminds me of two movies, Enemy of the State and, before that, The Net. While both fictional, they actually posed some great questions about the use of surveillance and personal data and paint a picture of how far it cold be taken. I think we are already living in Orwellian times. Big Brother is indeed watching, just far more subtle than Orwell's depiction. It's creeping up on us slowly like grape ivy up the side of a house.

The invasion of privacy for the most part seems to mean nothing ... until your one of those tiny percentages of people that make page 20 of the local newspaper. Officers kick in door of "wrong" home during night time drug sweep ... . Of course they probably kicked in 19 of 20 correct doors.

But when the sweep is ready to start ... you can rest assured they know how many polyps you have up your ass and what days you go shopping on.