war of terrorism

I don’t want to do this any more

Spread the love

First revision 13 july 2013

I don’t want to do this any more. I would much prefer to be sailing. I’d like to buy a small boat but then I’d need to be working and earning. I’d like a regular boyfriend. I’d like to drink less and make fewer rather embarrassing remarks.

I don’t want to do this any more. I want to be working and earning so that I can buy a small boat and go sailing. The trouble is that I can’t be working and earning because these bastards get in the way all the time.

I could be working and earning or just working on earning to start with if it wasn’t for these bastards. I’ve got some skill and knowledge with puters – it’s just problem-solving, analysis, understanding systems. I think that I’ve demonstrated that I’m able and bright enough to do that. I am. I have the ability to be a sys admin, network admin, programmer, etc. These bastards will never let me do that.

I know a good crowd who run a social enterprise. Basically it means that they make very little money but at least they are doing some good and improving themselves. I could hang round with them and do some work if it wasn’t for those bastards. Those bastards that interfere all the time spying and prying and breaking networks and things. I’ve tried, I can’t work at the social enterprise that I know.

Looks like I can’t have a boat because of the bastards. [24/07/13 edit: Then earn money doing some different work.]

I don’t want to do this any more. It started years ago around 98 or 99. I was one of the early bloggers. Reality cracking, rejecting the bullshit that they feed us every day, they take us for fools. That’s asking for it.

Ian Blair is quite a pathetic figure really. He’s achieved very little apart from covering up for murder and a big pension. Corrupt and promoted far above his intellect and abilities for political reasons. New Labour to the last he even blamed Boris when he cut the deal with Jacquie. He’s just a useless bastard really, a parasitic tic with the sadim touch.

It is worth looking at Ian Blair’s tenure as boss of the Metropolitan police. You’ll see that he did a lot of politicking and very little policing. There’s a lot of very thinly disguised bullshit going on, a definite agenda other than policing being followed. He was Tony Blair’s butler. I’ve lately been having this image of the two Blairs being cheeks of the same arse sharing a mouth. Ugh.

I don’t really want to do this any more because – contrary to some speculation in the past – I have achieved what I set out to achieve. I have cracked reality. I have reached an understanding of what it’s all about. It’s about a lot of things and about the interactions of a lot of things. I’m not likely to be able to explain even if you were accepting and attentive which is unlikely but perhaps I should try explaining some main points.

The concept of parallax. [Thanks Parallax:)

Things look different according to where you’re looking from.

So, being a suspected terrorist of the self-exploding type I can reason that there are no real terrorists. Since I know for a fact that I am not a terrorist but instead labelled as a terrorist I can reasonably conclude that there are many more similar to me. I am in fact aware that there are many others similar to me. For example, in UK whole political groups of non-terrorists have been labelled terrorists.

What’s going on here then? Are there terrorists or not?

There are certainly terrorists.

There is the odd one or two obviously insane terrorists like the failed shoe bomber. This is interesting because labelling people as terrorists as the authorities do is likely to lead to self-fulfilling prophesies in some cases. It is also likely that that is the intention since there is a definite dearth of terrorist terrorists.

Then there are people who hack people to death on crowded streets in daylight. They’re not terrorists. They’re racially-motivated murderers. Incidentally, it’s interesting to see how the press and media were manipulated in such cases.

Then there are the real terrorists. The SAS got caught with bombs in Basra. Terrorists. We know that they’re terrorists because they had bombs, were disguised, didn’t have a reasonable explanation and were broken out of jail by the UK army.

Then there is the modus operandi of the terrorists. They arrange a security drill to make sure they’re all in place to control the act and the press and media. Then they blame Islam and Muslims, even sometimes making false claims on websites. Sometimes they even sneakily change laws just to make sure they will never be held to account for their terrorism. The timing is also often very convenient or accords to some higher (Non-Muslim) reason.

Then there are terrorist acts which are known as military operations like killing hundreds of thousands on innocent Iraqis or war crimes using banned chemical weapons like white phosphorous. Oh FM don’t mention that, that was the Israelis. Somehow these incidents are not recognised as terrorism.

I’ve got it. Terrorists are the people that the Fascist scum criminals in power are opposed to. So political activists and opponents to scum politicians are terrorists except of course that they’re not: they’re political activists and opponents of scum politicians. You get people like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden labelled as terrorists except of course that they’re not. They’re not even traitors – they’re serving their people and opposing scum politicians / real terrorists.

So why does Islam and Muslims get blamed so much?

Islam and Muslims are a hindrance to Capitalism. Capitalism needs to make more profit and expand into Muslim countries. How can Capitalism do that if these people look after each other and indulge in charitable giving and the like? Capitalism needs to burn that oil.

Is that about it?

That’s about it except about scum politicians. Tony Blair and his bunch of shits weren’t socialists. Nick Clegg and his bunch of shits are not liberals. They’re all Neo-Liberal Neo-Conservatives who have hijacked their respective parties. The UK ‘Liberal Democrats’ are doing some awfully illiberal things because Clegg and his crew are huge Tory bastards pretending to be liberals.

I feel a bit better now. I suppose that I have to do it. Nobody else will.

 

13/07/13 7.50am typos corrected

19/07/13 11am added links

 

Continue ReadingI don’t want to do this any more

About Prism’s covert spying UPDATED 14/06/13

Spread the love
Companies involved in Prism spying
Companies involved in Prism spying

Prism, a clandestine system of spying on people involving many large internet companies was revealed by the newspapers the Washington Post and the Guardian on 6 June 2013 having – it is later revealed – been leaked by Edward Snowden.

The leaked documents revealed a routine, automated system of spying on people involving many of the largest internet companies – Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, YouTube, Apple, etc. The leaked documents were in the form of a Powerpoint presentation presumably used to train intelligence agents. The Guardian further claimed on 7 June 2013 that the UK’s covert surveillance centre GCHQ had access to the NSA’s Prism system from at least 2010.

Prism raises some big issues: First, that people – including US citizens – are spied on as a matter of routine. Second, that huge internet companies have so readily assisted spying on people and then strangely denied it so strongly despite there being overwhelming evidence. Third, the closeness of huge corporations and the US state.

US and UK law is similar in that covert spying should be authorised rather than routine. The normal and expected procedure is that there exists an element of suspicion of some serious crime and some legal authority e.g. a warrant would be issued. Prism seems far more routine and relaxed. Safeguards to prevent US authorities spying on US citizens appear to be so weak as to be effectively useless.

Wikipedia suggests that gagging orders have been served on the big internet companies so they are legally prevented from disclosing their involvement in Prism. We have similar gagging orders in the UK under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

I was thinking more about interpreting the literal meanings of the carefully-crafted denials.

Microsoft: “We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don’t participate in it.”

So they’ve had a legally binding order or subpoena to disclose information, only respond to specific accounts or identifiers (what about all or every? is that specific enough?) and don’t do it voluntary. Not nuch of a denial really.

Yahoo!: “Yahoo! takes users’ privacy very seriously. We do not provide the government with direct access to our servers, systems, or network.”

… but we do provide them with indirect access?

Google: “Google cares deeply about the security of our users’ data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government ‘back door‘ into our systems, but Google does not have a backdoor for the government to access private user data.”

According to law, no backdoor. What about the front door keys? ‘backdoor’ has a specific meaning which is about unauthorised access.

The internet is a network of servers. What if the NSA owned the servers that surround these internet companies? No need for a back door then. There’s no need to access a system if you can access all traffic that goes in and out. If I had a router on the internet I could inspect, store and analyse all traffic flowing through it: I just need to put it next – in the route – to an interesting machine.

I would be concerned by the closeness of government and corporatism [corporations] if I were some foreign governments. Where’s the payback? Are these corporations not going to use this spying technology for corporate advantage? There’s also the issue about Mussolini’s definition of Fascism. These corporations are playing along with the BS. Is there also a payback that they’re able to enrich themselves by evading taxes?

We live in an era of fake manufactured terrorism being the quite ridiculous dominant ideology. People are controlled through fear. Corrupt governments need to spy on their people to maintain control. There are very dangerous people that actually have a mind of their own. Governments and their political apointees will use this technology to corruptly maintain control. There are plenty of examples of USUK governments engaging in mass deception recently.

14/06/13 UPDATE

An interesting article here discusses US government spies ‘tapping’ AT&T in 2006:

In 2002, a visitor to his AT&T office in San Francisco identified himself as an NSA representative. The official interviewed Klein’s colleague, who said he was given top-secret government clearance soon after the encounter.

A year later when Klein he saw the colleague installing a special room, which only that person was allowed to enter.

When the colleague retired in 2004, he gave Mr Klein several documents, including highly technical wiring diagrams. The diagrams showed AT&T’s electronic communications flowed through a “splitter” which created identical copies of the digital material.

One copy continued on to its intended destination of consumer email in-boxes, phones and the like. The other copy flowed into the secret room.

It was clear that the NSA was looking at everything and not just foreign communications.

The article raises a number of issues:

  1. NSA is indiscriminate in collecting data
  2. It supports my earlier contention in the original article that it’s access to the data that is key rather than access to actual servers
  3. Concerning the ridiculous denials by the corporations: Language is key to these denials. Technical language from the domain of networking is used to obfuscate the debate: There is no need for access to ‘servers’ or a ‘back door’ if you have access to a ‘router’, a ‘feed’, a ‘split’ or a ‘tap’.

 

 

 

Continue ReadingAbout Prism’s covert spying UPDATED 14/06/13

Jimmy Savile, Ian Blair, the police and the IPCC

Spread the love

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary reports on the many instances that the police refused to pursue allegations against Jimmy Savile due to his status and affiliation(s?). Savile was effectively above the law because it was not applied to hime

The missed chances to get Jimmy Savile

The official report into what police knew – and, critically, failed to do – about Jimmy Savile makes grim reading.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, the watchdog that looks at how the police function, looked for evidence of reports, complaints and intelligence that had been gathered on Savile down the years.

They didn’t find a great deal – just seven potentially actionable complaints which emerged during a series of incidents. The inspectorate lists a further series of incidents in which people tried to report Savile and, in effect, failed to get the police to record what they were being told. …

I want it on record that I have experienced the same in trying to get the police to investigate allegations of very serious crimes against former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Ian Blair. I have made serious allegations to the police which are simply ignored. This is exactly the same as with Savile – he’s protected through the police’s refusal to record or take action on any credible allegations against him. Similarly, again it is because of his status and affiliation(s?) although I’m sure that Blair can’t now have any friends and must be universally hated for the useless little shit that he is and has been.

Which brings us to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). Why are police treated so differently when they are accused and investigated? Shouldn’t they simply be investigated like any other criminals? Why are they told of accusations against them?

Continue ReadingJimmy Savile, Ian Blair, the police and the IPCC

About the spook and an earlier one on 7/7

Spread the love

On Christmas Eve, I claimed to have discovered a nasty spook. A spook is a term for a spy – somebody who presents a fake image for unsavoury purposes, usually to deceive.

I had had a few drinks so I could be mistaken … but it was wierd. We had been talking only briefly when I realised that I recognised him but I was unsure from where. I told him that I recognised him and then I realised from where. He presents himself totally differently elsewhere with totally different clothing and even a different nationality of accent.

As I say, I suppose that I could be mistaken but when you know somebody visually well, you can recognise them. I hadn’t seen this person for four months or so but I do believe that I recognised him and he didn’t deny it.

I know that this is one of spooks’ techniques because I’ve seen it before. At the bus bombing of 7 July, 2005 there is a white haired man with a strong Blackcountry accent giving statements to television reporters. I recognised him as a spook because he was one of UK’s biggest spooks, working for UK defence company Quinetic at the time. I know he’s a spook because we followed the same course at University.

It was a fake accent but he was exactly where one of UK’s highest spooks would be expected on 7 July, 2005. Spooks must practice the accents. His surname was correct while his first name was not. I’ve published his name elsewhere.

later edit: You may as well have the name. The name is Bryan/Brian Jones.

29/12/12: To be entirely correct: I am aware that he worked for Quinetic 1999-2000.

Continue ReadingAbout the spook and an earlier one on 7/7

UK political news review

Spread the love

Since the last UK politics news review the main issue is that the official narrative of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster has been proved to be totally fabricated. Feckin wake up will you? Terrrists that hate our freedoms brought down two skyscrapers, Suicide bombers in London, JCD was not murdered by Zionist scum? Come on.

Continue ReadingUK political news review