Tagged: FBI Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kurt Brindley 8:00 am on February 17, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , DIA, , , FBI, IC, Intel Community, , Joseph Stalin, , ODNI, , ,   

    #RESISTTHEPURGE // #SUPPORTINTELLIGENCE 

    Let @TheRealDonaldTrump know with a relentless flurry of tweets that you oppose and resit any effort of his to Purge the Intelligence Community a la Joseph Stalin and other such tyrannical dictators and authoritarians past and present.

    And then, with just as much zeal if not more, tweet shout outs to the Intel Community to let them know that you support them in their tireless efforts to keep us safe and will oppose and resist a Trump Intelligence Purge by all means necessary, if necessary.

    Or something to that effect…

    Listed here are just a few of the more Trump-embattled IC organizations. You can see a list of all member organizations, including a brief overview of their mission, here

    #RESISTTHEPURGE
    #SUPPORTINTELLIGENCE
    #STAYRELENTLESS

     

    Advertisements
     
  • Kurt Brindley 4:04 pm on July 5, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , classified material, crimes, elites, email scandal, FBI, , , , , , presidential candidates   

    So here’s my conundrum… update #3 

    Okay… of course we knew Hillary Clinton wasn’t going to get indicted. And I don’t think Bill meeting with the Attorney General to ensure she didn’t get indicted really mattered. Elites don’t get indicted. Period.

    And, who knows, maybe a typical Intelligence Community peon being investigated for the same crime wouldn’t get indicted either.

    But we all know the IC peon would at least lose his or her access to classified material and/or his or her clearance, which would mean that he or she would be out of a job.

    ‪‎Hillary‬, of course, won’t lose her access, her clearance, or her candidacy for the president.

    What a farce.

    #‎elitelivesmatter‬…most

     
     

     
    • juliabarrett 4:12 pm on July 5, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      I am so disgusted right now. I can’t even speak about it. My cynicism knows no bounds. #NeverHillary

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kurt Brindley 4:17 pm on July 5, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        Yeah, it’s a sham; but the problem is mostly the system that we allow to control us. Hillary is just acting like a normal elite. I get more upset over General Petraeus essentially getting off scot-free after giving his lover classified material. Another elite. So, in response to your #NeverHillary, she’s still by far the lesser of two evils between her and Trump. Not even close.

        Liked by 1 person

      • renemiller012058 11:59 am on July 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        If we took the whole system, wiped anyone out who had any sort of crooked curve in their “self description”, what would we have left to work with? Not much I’m afraid. There will always be ugliness, slanderous, adulterous, back stabbing, ladder climbing, liars, cheaters, even murderers! In fact, we probably have more people in our political world; people that we put into office, that are not law abiding citizens (if they are citizens to begin with). We have law-breakers, felons even though they have never been tried and convicted, they are hiding behind their political facade. ***Yep, just like those Nazi war criminals who collected 20 million in social security benefits. (SEE BELOW)
        But whose fault is this really? We are millions of controlled brains (some very smart and some not so very) running all over the place trying to vote for the people we think would best fill those shoes. But BEFORE WE VOTE, do we get to hear their background before they get into office?

        Maybe we, those American Citizens should begin to look at our laws? Could be that there are some changes in order and I don’t mean later before it’s too late either. Maybe those who want to run our America should have to fill some pretty strict rules, and fit into much bigger shoes? Think about it. If we vote for them and they are full of old problems, it’s not their fault for getting in to office!

        Now read this and get pissed off…..I did (sorry for my language guys)
        Are we really required to pay federal taxes? Why are we paying such high state taxes? I can understand some of it but did you know (the last I checked this was still happening) that we are still paying social security to Nazi war criminals?
        “Report: Ex-Nazis received $20 million in Social Security benefits | PBS … http://www.pbs.org/newshour/…/ex-nazis-got-20-million-social-security-watchdog-says/ PBS
        May 31, 2015 – A Social Security Administration watchdog found the agency paid $20.2 million in benefits to more than 130 suspected Nazi war criminals, …”
        “America has paid alleged Nazi war criminals millions in Social …
        theweek.com/…/america-paid-alleged-nazi-war-criminals-millions-social-se… The Week
        Between 1979 and 2007, at least 38 of 66 alleged Nazi war criminals were forced out of the U.S. but allowed to keep their Social Security benefits, according to a ..”

        Thanks for letting me vent; sorry I went on so long…you just hit a nerve I guess.

        Like

    • Mellow Curmudgeon 4:59 pm on July 5, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      That hashtag [#‎eliteslivesmatter‬…most] is so eloquent. While a few of the Enron scumbags did get indicted, villains who close their shirt sleeves with cufflinks are almost always 2big2jail.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Kurt Brindley 5:09 pm on July 5, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        Yeah man… money and power like Enron stooges had isn’t always enough; money and political power like Clintons have usually is.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Mani (A New Life Wandering) 5:40 pm on July 5, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      That hashtag! .. The whole thing pisses me off. It’s out of control.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Don Massenzio 6:18 am on July 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      I’m not a Hillary supporter, nor do I support Trump. The reality is, we have two elites running for president. Neither will represent the common man or woman. You have to choose between two very bad candidates. Do you pick the intelligent one that lies and cheats or the ignorant, bigoted one that lies and cheats. Arsenic or cyanide?

      Liked by 3 people

      • Kurt Brindley 12:14 pm on July 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        Arsenic, please. :(

        Liked by 2 people

        • Don Massenzio 12:19 pm on July 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply

          Same unfortunate result.

          Liked by 1 person

          • renemiller012058 8:24 pm on July 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply

            Isn’t this the same thing that happened four years ago? There was basically no one to choose from to vote for, so we gave the job to the only choice we had. I don’t know if I can recall what happened eight years ago, but I would bet we still had the same types of “two” to choose from.

            Like

      • rhythmprism 11:16 am on July 10, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        If you’re in a debate and you allow your opponent to frame the terms of an argument you’re trapped. I think the US public has allowed dominant political forces to define the terms of our election. Why only two choices? If we look around the world at other developed democracies, many have several options. We call alternatives to Democrats and Republicans 3rd parties, as though these are not viable alternatives. They’re not viable because we ignore them. We’ve allowed those who hold power to frame the argument in terms of ‘us’ or ‘them’. Mainstream media reinforces the either or paradigm because the media is part of the power elite. Think of the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Politicians and media outlets represent the same power elite.
        We need to take our political system back. If we want alternatives to the two that are filtered out of a wide field in every election cycle, then we must encourage competition by supporting lesser known candidates. One place to start would be the debates. A 15% participation threshold means only those highlighted by mainstream media will be presented to the public. Think of the power that gives the media and their allies in the political elite. We should demand more voices, more choices. That’s a democracy

        Liked by 1 person

    • Alli Farkas 9:37 am on July 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      Here’s a fun comprehensive list of politicians and other government folk who were convicted of crimes, going all the way back to the late 1700’s. It’s interesting to see how pretty much evenly split the convictions are between the two parties. Also interesting to see how few actually went to prison, and how many got off with light fines, light sentences, or probation.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kurt Brindley 12:16 pm on July 6, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        Great list, as frightening as it may be. All I can say in response is… Sigh. At least the Cavs won the NBA Championship.

        Liked by 2 people

  • Kurt Brindley 12:37 pm on March 3, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , encryption, , FBI, , , IPhone, , privacy, privacy versus security, San Bernardino terrorists, , ,   

    Technological Stones… or Lack Thereof 

    So about this US Government versus ‪‎Apple‬ debacle re: unlocking the San Bernardino ‪‎terrorists‬’ ‪‎iPhone‬…

    It’s been confounding me as to the solution for a while now.

    It falls into the broad national/global discussion that’s been going on since 9/11 as to what is the proper balance when it comes to ‎Privacy‬ versus ‪‎Security‬?

    Is there even such a thing?

    Or is it more like sailing a ship, where we know exactly where we want to navigate to, yet we continually have to make course corrections to get there…

    Big question.

    But as far as this phone debacle, I, like the not so fly Super Spy General Hayden, do not believe the government should be allowed a “key to the back door” into all encrypted phones/technology.

    However, while listening to the ‎FBI‬ Director testify before ‎Congress‬ re: the debacle, he made a pretty eye-opening, yet pretty basic statement when considering our ‪Constitution‬ and our normal policing practices for entering a citizen’s personal places and spaces…
    It’s called a ‪‎warrant‬.

    The police can get a warrant to access a suspect’s home, car, storage locker, library account, etc….

    Why cannot the police get a warrant to access a locked phone?

     
     

     
    • Alli Farkas 2:09 pm on March 3, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      Looks like the FBI could have saved themselves a heap of trouble if they had just not reset the phone’s password.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mellow Curmudgeon 8:47 pm on March 3, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      I like the sailing analogy. It is indeed a *sailing* ship that needs adjustments to direction and trim as the wind shifts. No simple answers suffice.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Norbert Haupt 12:33 am on March 4, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      The police cannot get a warrant to access a locked phone, because the only key that ever existed is now dead (the terrorist). There is no key. It’s sealed for good. Apple would have to make a “master key” for all phones and give them that. Once such a key exists, 700 million iPhones can essentially be opened with that key.

      This is a great oversimplification, but I hope I made the point. There is no key, so a warrant is not going to help.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kurt Brindley 11:22 am on March 4, 2016 Permalink | Reply

        That’s a great overview, Norbert. Thank you. I should have said such in the post – it would have made things clearer.

        But yours is exactly the point. Until there is a better answer, it appears there must be a master key.

        Can anyone really expect that just because a murder suspect died, the police would or could never search his or her home?

        I may be wrong, but my understanding is that the FBI wasn’t even asking for Apple to break into the phone. They were asking that Apple manipulate the phone so the password attempts would be unlimited, thereby allowing the government as many attempts necessary at figuring out the password phone without it locking and erasing the data.

        There has to be a solution to this technological debacle where a legal warrant is able to be served and legally executed on any encrypted technology.

        Thanks so much for contributing to this discussion, my friend.

        Like

        • Norbert Haupt 12:47 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink | Reply

          Well, what you’re asking for is a “golden key”. If Apple created an operating system that allowed unlimited tries, and there are only 10,000 combinations, any hacker could do it in a day or two. If I got a hold of that operating system (the golden key) and installed it on a device, then I could just sit there for a day or two, try all 10,000 combinations, and open the phone. Any stolen, lost or otherwise obtained phone could be accessed. THAT IS CALLED A BACKDOOR. If a backdoor exists, all doors are always open to anyone.

          Like

          • Kurt Brindley 1:08 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink | Reply

            And any house can be broken into. Why are phones any different?

            I mean, if we have really important physical stuff in our house, we either by a home safe to put it in or stow it in a safe-deposit box.

            If a pervert keeps pictures of naked children on his computer, a warrant to search his home will cover it. Are you saying a pedophile should be allowed to safely keep such pictures on his phone without worry of a warrant?

            Like

            • Norbert Haupt 1:31 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink

              No, I am not saying this at all. But you can’t have security for everyone but not for pedophiles. That’s the tradeoff in our society.

              If I knew my phone was not secure, I would not use it with Applepay at the grocery store anymore, I would not use it to buy coffee at Starbucks, I would not use it to access my bank account anymore. Heck – I would not buy a smartphone anymore. If we make them “unsecure” we’re killing that entire market segment. Those of us that know will stop using them. Those that don’t know will become crime victims by the millions. I am a software professional. Do you realize that if I WANTED to, I could then make a lucrative underground business stealing people’s stuff right out of their phone without them knowing it? How many hackers do you think are sitting in apartments in Russia ready to tap into your phone if it’s open?

              There is no half-measures here. For every single terrorist and pedophile hiding his stuff, there are a million unaware law-abiding citizens that are then wide open victims. We cannot allow that as a society.

              Like

            • Norbert Haupt 1:34 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink

              Houses vs Phones: Houses keep your clothes, your TV, your stuff. Phones keep your entire financial life, your identity. Your phone’s content is hugely more vulnerable than your house. Besides, if houses could be built so they could not be broken into, we would have built them that way. Fortunately, with phones (computers) we have a way.

              Like

            • Kurt Brindley 3:55 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink

              I am less concerned about your or anyone else’s ease and security of buying more stuff than I am of of the ease and security of terrorists and drug dealers and pedophiles or any other criminal to further their nefarious acts.

              If you want to have your freedoms to do whatever you want on your phones without worry, than it is incumbent upon business to create the technology to provide for your needs as well as society’s law enforcement needs.

              Good stuff, Norbert. We’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one it seems. :)

              Liked by 1 person

            • Norbert Haupt 5:31 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink

              Seriously? I am not sure this is about agreeing or not. If I told you that if I knew your phone number I could hack into your phone without your knowledge, listen to your conversations (since there is a microphone), watch your banking transactions you may do, that would not bother you? Just trying to understand….

              Like

            • Kurt Brindley 5:42 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink

              Seriously. The government and/or any motivated nefarious soul can do that now outside of my mobile phone or computer. Landline phones were being tapped for many many decades, or people were being spied upon or stalked for many many centuries, etc. What is so special about the mobile phone? I just do not get it. I understand the capacity for data that it has, but that should not mean it deserves its own special protected category.

              I don’t mean to offend but it blows my mind that you don’t see this.

              Nor, apparently, will you ever see it so… shall we just put this discussion on hold for now? I am going to keep researching this topic and if my views change or if I find something new that I believe will add value to this discussion then I’ll pass it along. And I ask for you do to do the same. :)

              Ps… if you do feel the need to continue this discussion, please continue in a new reply box. I love this theme I’m using except for the way it threads the comments.

              Liked by 1 person

            • Norbert Haupt 12:31 am on March 5, 2016 Permalink

              No problem here if you want to delete this thread…..

              Like

            • Kurt Brindley 12:36 am on March 5, 2016 Permalink

              Why? No desire to delete – it’s an awesome discussion. I really enjoyed it… I just think we’ve reached a point of diminishing returns. As for the threading, I reduced the the number so it shouldn’t look as scrunched up now.

              Like

    • Don Massenzio 3:31 pm on March 4, 2016 Permalink | Reply

      I have a feeling that this issue will not go away anytime soon.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kurt Brindley 12:16 pm on March 19, 2016 Permalink | Reply

  • Kurt Brindley 4:03 am on September 19, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , debt, , FBI, , , , , nervous breakdown, nuclear brinkmanship, , population, poverty, , , , violent crime,   

    National Nervous Breakdown 

    Maybe it’s just because I’m off work recovering from cancer and have more time to pay attention to current events, but it seems to me that insane violent crimes are happening almost daily. Just this week, a doctor at Johns Hopkins hospital was shot by the son of a patient. The son ended up also shooting the patient, his mother, and then himself. The week before that, there was the Discovery building hostage situation, and several weeks before that there was the mother who drowned her children. I could go on and on with all the insanity that has been happening in the past year or two but this post has already depressed me enough so I won’t.

    Instinctively, I want to say that it is the bad economy and the stress that it has been inflicting on our nation as a whole that is responsible for all these insane violent crimes; however, after a quick search of the topic, I’ve found that, according to the FBI, violent crime has actually been decreasing, even during the economic crisis.

    I’m no expert, but after thinking about it for a bit, it seems to me that violent crimes—murders, rapes, assaults—which are tragic enough, are not the same as these insane violent crimes—shooting a doctor and then your mother in a hospital, taking hostages because you hate people for killing the earth, drowning your children and then making it look like an accident, or dressing up as Santa Claus and going on a killing rampage—so maybe the FBI statistics don’t really apply here. Maybe, but I really don’t know.

    What I do know is that as long as we have a significant portion of our population raised and socialized in violent, abusive, poverty-ridden environments, then we’re going to continue to have a portion of our population suffering from the violent crimes that are committed as a result of this environment and socialization. And as long as these violent crimes are isolated to just a portion of our population, then the majority of the population will, unfortunately, be able to easily turn a blind eye to most of it.

    But when the entire population is suffering under economic stress, debt, ineffectual national leaders, divisive, vindictive politics, perpetual war, nuclear brinkmanship, excessive military buildup, constant threat of terrorism, and an increasing feeling of no hope of change for the better, like it is now, then we all are going to suffer from it, no one is going to be able to turn a blind eye toward it, and, if things don’t change soon, the entire population will eventually have a national nervous breakdown from it.

    Perhaps all of these insane violent crimes that have been happening recently are the first cracks in our national psyche.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel