Join 3,555 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


We admire your work
September 18, 2008 6:42 AM   Subscribe

We know the NSA is watching. They have corporate buddies to help them out. But now they've found a true ideological soul mate - China

While there are significant hurdles to be overcome for Q6/17's plans to become a reality, it doesn't make people feel any better when they are using justifications like this. [Via]
posted by cimbrog (67 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite

 
"A United Nations agency is quietly drafting technical standards, proposed by the Chinese government, to define methods of tracing the original source of Internet communications and potentially curbing the ability of users to remain anonymous."

So we're safe. The UN will screw this up too.
posted by three blind mice at 7:03 AM on September 18, 2008


I saw an article about this the other day. It reads like a rejected scene from Brazil. The Chinese government is the last entity that should ever be consulted on matters of internet privacy.
posted by Inspector.Gadget at 7:19 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


This post was deleted for the following reason: There is no Metafilter. There never was a Metafilter. Move along. -- Operator #8764583
posted by ardgedee at 7:20 AM on September 18, 2008


Rather then liberalizing Chinese society, their economic success is having the perverse effect of exporting their censorship, and now their monitoring capability to the rest of the world.

Fun times.
posted by delmoi at 7:35 AM on September 18, 2008 [9 favorites]


Justice Louis Brandeis' famous dissent in Olmstead v United States:

"The evil incident to invasion of the privacy of the telephone is far greater than that involved in tampering with the mails." [...]

"Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. [...] if the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face."
posted by kid ichorous at 7:41 AM on September 18, 2008 [11 favorites]


Actually, I'm starting to see the more economically powerful an entity becomes, the less it feels it can afford freedom.
posted by sourwookie at 7:43 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Rather then liberalizing Chinese society, their economic success is having the perverse effect of exporting their censorship, and now their monitoring capability to the rest of the world.

It's great listening to people who were fine with America using its economic might to spread its culture get upset at China for doing the same. Reminds me of how the Republicans suddenly noticed, in late 2001, that women were severely maltreated by the Taliban.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:17 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Actually, I'm starting to see the more economically powerful an entity becomes, the less it feels it can afford freedom.
posted by sourwookie at 7:43 AM on September 18


what happens when they become less economically powerful and can't keep up the monthly payments on the lack of freedom?
posted by infini at 8:20 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


In Sino-America, freedom erodes YOU!
posted by blue_beetle at 8:23 AM on September 18, 2008 [3 favorites]


It's great listening to people who were fine with America using its economic might to spread its culture get upset at China for doing the same.

Did you know that the U.S. has more Chinese food restaurants then it does Burger Joints? When was the last time you heard someone complain about that? No one is complaining about the exportation of Chinese "culture", the problem is the export of Chinese political philosophy, which isn't even more then a few decades old anyway (it's obviously nothing like Maoism)

Besides, in what sense have I ever said I was "fine" with the U.S exporting it's own economic policy by force? I'm all for economic self-determination. I'm not even a fan of things like the WTO and the World Bank, which seem to make things worse as often as they make things better.

But I also believe individual liberties need to take precidence over state "liberties" All people should have freedom of speech, association, etc.
posted by delmoi at 8:28 AM on September 18, 2008


delmoi, if you can believe Confessions of an Economic Hitman, the explicit purpose of the WTO and the World Bank are to keep poor countries poor, and in thrall to the United States.

I don't know if that's true, but it's sure apparent that anytime they get involved, small countries mysteriously fail to thrive.
posted by Malor at 8:35 AM on September 18, 2008 [4 favorites]


It's great listening to people who were fine with America using its economic might to spread its culture get upset at China for doing the same.

Are we categorizing repression as a cultural phenomenon? Because, if so, we can all stop worrying about Darfur, Tibet, Uganda, Gitmo, etc. Right?
posted by JaredSeth at 8:36 AM on September 18, 2008


Actually, the NSA has been in existence longer than any PRoC analogue; furthermore, Olmstead, linked above, permitted government wiretaps without judicial review back in 1928. So it's fair to say that, though China is unusually committed to the murder of private thought, we struck the first blows.
posted by kid ichorous at 8:39 AM on September 18, 2008 [2 favorites]


Wait a minute, I thought we were at war with Eastasia!



This poster was deleted for the following reason: Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia -- Operator #8764583

posted by tommasz at 8:48 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


No one is complaining about the exportation of Chinese "culture", the problem is the export of Chinese political philosophy

Political philosophy is an aspect of culture and is, I would claim, more significant than food. Certainly it has a greater impact on the everyday lives of those affected by it.

Besides, in what sense have I ever said I was "fine" with the U.S exporting it's own economic policy by force?

You haven't, and I apologize if my phrasing implied that my comment was directed at you. It was not.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:51 AM on September 18, 2008


It's times like this I'm glad my the legislative branch of my government (Canadian) is totally impotent, and that we have a privacy commissioner who gives nasty phone calls to certain industry ministers for trying to curb online rights.
posted by Pseudology at 8:52 AM on September 18, 2008


Political philosophy is an aspect of culture and is, I would claim, more significant than food.

You take that back! You take it back right now!
posted by odinsdream at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2008


I don't see what is "cultural" about this. Repression of individual freedom of speech and conscience is something seen in pretty much every culture at some point, as is popular anger and protest against it. Did not Tianamen Square demonstrate that there are Chinese who adhere to a belief in freedom and rule of law? Are they somehow less "Chinese", less representative of Chinese culture, than the people presently in power?
Anyway, from a cursory reading of the links above, I imagine that this is going to be infinitely more difficult to actually implement than to propose. Not to say that it shouldn't be fought on principle.
posted by AdamCSnider at 9:22 AM on September 18, 2008


Heckuva job Brownshirtie!
posted by blue_beetle at 9:25 AM on September 18, 2008


NSA: So isn't it kind of difficult tracking that many people, I mean, don't you have like a billion citizens?

China: Yeah, something like that. I think it's actually 1.3 billion, but really what's three hundred million, right?

NSA: But we never hear from 'em. I would think that with that many people, and the kind of... you know, policies that you guys have, a lot more people would be bitching on the internet about it.

China: Yeah, you'd think that. Weird how it actually works out though.

NSA: ...

NSA: So, this software you have, it really works that well?

China: *raises eyebrow*

NSA: We'll take it.
posted by quin at 9:32 AM on September 18, 2008 [11 favorites]


if you can believe Confessions of an Economic Hitman

You can't, so what's your point?
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 9:55 AM on September 18, 2008


sourwookie writes "Actually, I'm starting to see the more economically powerful an entity becomes, the less it feels it can afford freedom."

This is not consistently the case by any means. For example, North Korea.
posted by krinklyfig at 10:27 AM on September 18, 2008


AdamCSnider writes "I don't see what is 'cultural' about this. Repression of individual freedom of speech and conscience is something seen in pretty much every culture at some point, as is popular anger and protest against it. Did not Tianamen Square demonstrate that there are Chinese who adhere to a belief in freedom and rule of law? Are they somehow less 'Chinese', less representative of Chinese culture, than the people presently in power?"

One of the most consistent mistakes we in the US make is that we assume everyone in the world wants what we want. This creates a great deal of misunderstanding.
posted by krinklyfig at 10:33 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


You can't, so what's your point?

And that op-ed is the truthiness!
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:34 AM on September 18, 2008


Amazingly enough, we (the US) managed to make it through the entirety of the 20th century without figuring out that increasing capitalism does not always correlate with increasing civil liberty. Yet we still insist that there must be a connection. Because believing must make it so. Faith-based economics.

Also: would it be better if I began learning Mandarin or Cantonese?
posted by BitterOldPunk at 10:40 AM on September 18, 2008


One of the most consistent mistakes we in the US make is that we assume everyone in the world wants what we want. This creates a great deal of misunderstanding.

But wasn't one of the great successes attributed to Deng Xiao Ping getting the people to accept economic reform over political reform? That is, a Buick and a full stomach over true democracy? This sounds exactly like what Americans want.
posted by kid ichorous at 10:41 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Cool Papa Bell wrote:


if you can believe Confessions of an Economic Hitman

You can't, so what's your point?


Mallaby is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, one of the groups Perkins attacks in his book. Not exactly an unbiased source. Also, I find the things he does not attack Perkins on to be quite chilling. Mallaby's argument seems to be the ends justify the means rather than Perkins is lying about what we do. No one seems to argue that these economic organizations exist to further American corporate dominance throughout the world - at any cost. That's the part of the book I found sickening. It's almost like the argument Walmart makes when the move into a town. Well, the unemployment rate was 5% when we moved in, now it's 3.5%. Nevermind the fact that those 1.5% that got jobs at Walmart cannot even support their families or afford health care on their Walmart salary.
posted by any major dude at 10:45 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Did you guys even read Confessions, like I did (or actually, like I tried to do ... because I got 3/4 of the way through it and tossed it aside)? Or are you just picking up on the echo chamber vibe of the people that read, like, the synopsis on the back of the book?

Because, I have a hard time going along with anyone that actually read the book and thought it was a true story. We could argue about the roles of the organizations it mentions, but the novelized style and breathless prose alone just scream that it's a con-job, like A Million Little Pieces.

I mean, you guys realize it's written as a novel, not like a piece of sourced journalism, or even a memoir? Even Upton Sinclair never claimed The Jungle was a true story...
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 10:54 AM on September 18, 2008


Widespread cell phone location snooping by NSA?
posted by homunculus at 11:02 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Wiretap suits press on in the wake of FISA amendments
posted by homunculus at 11:03 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Cool Papa Bell, I did read the entire book and he explains in the forward why he was convinced to write the book in novel form. Immediately after reading the book I went searching on the internet for some information exposing his confessions as fraud and all I found was people who chose to nitpik his facts, but no one argued against his main thesis - that the World Bank, IMF, Council on Foreign Relations etc were wholly corporate instruments bent on using the might of the US government to do whatever it took to expand America's corporate and military hegemony. This is hardly a new concept given all we know about the ousting of Mossadeq in Iran and Allende in Chile and Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán in Guatemala which all actions sanctioned by the United States government at the behest of US corporate interests. It's just the institutionalizing of the process. So I'm curious to know why you decided to dismiss the book out of hand just on the basis of its sub-par prose.
posted by any major dude at 11:18 AM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Actually, I'm starting to see the more economically powerful an entity becomes, the less it feels it can afford freedom.

Funny, the same thing happened with my grandparents.
posted by rokusan at 11:34 AM on September 18, 2008


If you can believe Confessions of an Economic Hitman, the explicit purpose of the WTO and the World Bank are to keep poor countries poor, and in thrall to the United States.

Well, as a well-established wacko conspiracy nutjob who wears a tinfoil sleeping cap to keep out the evil radio waves... naturally I do believe that's the purpose of the World Bank, more or less. It's close to the same way that its the "real" function of credit card companies to keep consumers in the same straits for the same reasons, by saddling the desperate with barely-manageable yokes, designed for maximum just-scraping-by-ability.

The second part of your statement, then, is more to the point than the first.

But this word "explicit"... that's not really what it means. If it was explicit, that purpose would be their mission statement. I would be, like, in their motto. You know, an right-facing eagle, some fig leaves, and something like "We screwum mundi" underneath.
posted by rokusan at 11:41 AM on September 18, 2008


...but that book, or at least the 30 pages of it I read in a Chapters once (you know, so the overlords can't trace my forbidden knowledge through the internets) is pretty annoying. It proves its points as well as Confessions of a Dangerous Mind proved that the CIA was controlling game show hosts. Which is to say "Wow, well, maybe, but you made a really crappy case here."

Come to think of it, this word "confessions" seems to be abused a lot lately too. Hmm.
posted by rokusan at 11:43 AM on September 18, 2008


So I'm curious to know why you decided to dismiss the book out of hand just on the basis of its sub-par prose.

It's not because of the prose. It's because it is prose at all. It is a novelization. It offers no sources, no research, no footnotes, no bibliography, etc. It is therefore not a piece of journalism and cannot be used as evidence of anything.

If I go read a book by Bob Woodward, for example, I know he will have notes and tapes and such to back up the things he writes about.

Mind you, I'm not arguing anything about the institutions here. I just think Confessions is poppycock and hate that people whip it out as an argument enhancer.

It's like ... let's say I wrote about a novelized book about the president taking a meeting last week with the secretary of defense in the White House about starting a war in Ecuador. Yes, there is a president and a secretary of defense, and occasionally they take meetings in the White House. There is also a nation called Ecuador. So, does that mean this meeting really took place last week, or even that Ecuador was a topic of discussion at this meeting I claimed took place last week?

If you can't critically see the difference there, I can't help you. ;-)
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 11:46 AM on September 18, 2008


Well let's say Secretary of the Defense wrote a book about the incident, would you dismiss it out of hand just because he didn't think to wear a wire to the meeting? I don't understand why you don't want to argue about institutions when there is confirmed evidence that the United States has preemptively acted militarily in defense of commercial interests.
posted by any major dude at 12:21 PM on September 18, 2008


It offers no sources, no research, no footnotes, no bibliography, etc. It is therefore not a piece of journalism and cannot be used as evidence of anything.

Now I know you're lying about reading the book, because I pulled it off the shelf and confirmed that it does contain cited annotations. For folks reading along, start at pg. 230 of the hardcover.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:53 PM on September 18, 2008



The comments seem to have drifted from the original issue of the post to a spitting contest on a book about other issues.
posted by Postroad at 1:02 PM on September 18, 2008


That's just a smokescreen to throw off the NSA's Bayesian filters.
posted by kid ichorous at 1:10 PM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


I'll have to go to a bookstore and look again. I don't recall those being annotations about anything having to do with what the author was actually doing and reporting about, or if they were just annotations about known facts having little to do with the actions of an "economic hitman," along the lines of stating, "yes, there is such as thing as the IMF."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 1:11 PM on September 18, 2008


Wow. Remember folks: truthiness. It's true if it feels true to you, despite all evidence to the contrary.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:13 PM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Now I know you're lying about reading the book, because I pulled it off the shelf and confirmed that it does contain cited annotations. For folks reading along, start at pg. 230 of the hardcover.

Hey man there's a huge difference between footnotes and end notes! Just ask those guys who trashed Al Gore's book.

Um, in any event the truth value of Confessions is really sort immaterial with regards to the history of failure of the world bank/imf/etc. In fact, the intentionality of the failure is also Immaterial. The goal was the exportation of republican Ideology, and as we all know, that ideology is a failure. Failure through Hubris or Malice ultimately has the same moral value.
posted by delmoi at 1:16 PM on September 18, 2008 [2 favorites]


"I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenue in. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers...I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras "right" for American fruit companies in 1903. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints." -Marine Corps General Smedley D. Butler, 1931

But yeah, barring any indisputable proof, it's safe to assume that this kind of thing ended back in the old days. I mean, what possible reason exists for governments and corporations to help one another maintain or increase their power? A ridiculous notion!
posted by SaintCynr at 1:36 PM on September 18, 2008 [5 favorites]


BitterOldPunk To seriously answer your question re: Mandarin vs. Cantonese.

Mandarin, no question. Its the official language of the PRC, the *written* form is identical regardless of the dialect spoken, so it isn't as if you'll be unable to read stuff written by Cantonese speakers (quite important for us historians), and for non-historians that means you can exchange email with any literate Chinese person regardless of the dialect they speak.

Interestingly, most Chinese Americans speak Cantonese, its the dialect from the region around Hong Kong, and that's where the majority of Chinese immigrants to the US came from. But unless your main goal is speaking to Chinese Americans, I'd say Mandarin.
posted by sotonohito at 1:46 PM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Blaze, you're the one that's accepting Confessions because it feels true. I'm the one asking for real evidence.

There's gotta be a Colbert reference there somewhere, when someone is accusing you of doing something the exact opposite of what you're actually doing. Oh wait, it's called irony. It's like rain on your wedding day and shit.

I promise you that on the way home tonight, I'll stop at a bookstore and look at Confessions again. If I think I'm remembering something incorrectly, if I'm wrong about the book's supposed research, I'll come back here and say so.

I'd love to see you offer to do the same some time.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 2:13 PM on September 18, 2008


Blaze, you're the one that's accepting Confessions because it feels true. I'm the one asking for real evidence.

Whatever the merits of my "feelings" about it, at least I read it before opening my mouth about it.

If I think I'm remembering something incorrectly, if I'm wrong about the book's supposed research, I'll come back here and say so.

You said this: "It's because it is prose at all. It is a novelization." While you don't agree with the book's thesis — and that's fine, by the way — you know it's not a novelization or a fictionalization of any kind.

And so I hope you don't backpedal by saying the book doesn't contain research that meets your criteria. Because that would be pretty fucking lame.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:26 PM on September 18, 2008


if you can believe Confessions of an Economic Hitman

You can't, so what's your point?


That was a fun article! So basically:

Perkins -- The IMF and World Bank intentionally entangle developing countries in debt they cannot possibly pay their way out of, in order to force concessions on resources, UN votes, and whatever the west may want. This is partly achieved through inaccurate ("biased") assessment of the countries and ventures involved, and the willing cooperation of a corrupt elite which receives disproportionate benefits while their citizenry is enslaved in perpetual debt. All this is to ensure American dominance through its corporations in an unholy alliance of government, NGOs, IGOs, and corporations.

Mallaby -- He also wrote about new agey stuff! He writes in a style I think is ludicrous! Corporations are not "all-powerful"! Indonesia's infant mortality rates have fallen, while literacy rates have gone up! Multinationals pay better wages! It's not a conspiracy to dominate poor countries -- because these corporations are actually competing to do so!
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 2:54 PM on September 18, 2008 [3 favorites]


you know, the majority of the posts on the topic linked in the FPP are by humunculous so I suppose we now have the answer to the age old question "who will watch the watchers" eh?
posted by infini at 4:51 PM on September 18, 2008


eek, homunculous, sorry!
posted by infini at 4:51 PM on September 18, 2008


*adds infini to watch list*
posted by homunculus at 5:24 PM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


And I'm watching the guys who are watching the watchers.
Wonder who's watching me?
posted by cimbrog at 5:33 PM on September 18, 2008


Mallaby's thesis didn't seem to be so much that corporations and big international financial institutions are not acting in concert and for their own institutional interests as that the results of these actions are not always - not even usually - detrimental to the interests of the people in the country. It's the "everyone benefits" argument for globalization and multinational capitalism. I admit that I don't really know enough about the matter to argue one way or the other, but I don't see how his argument contradicts that of Perkins, who (presumably - I haven't read the book) is arguing that these activities also sometime do serious damage. Or does he argue that the effects are ALWAYS destructive?
posted by AdamCSnider at 5:56 PM on September 18, 2008


It's like ... let's say I wrote about a novelized book about the president taking a meeting last week with the secretary of defense in the White House about starting a war in Ecuador. Yes, there is a president and a secretary of defense, and occasionally they take meetings in the White House. There is also a nation called Ecuador. So, does that mean this meeting really took place last week, or even that Ecuador was a topic of discussion at this meeting I claimed took place last week?

Oh! You almost had it! What if you wrote a novelized book about the president meeting last week with the secretary of defense about starting a war in Ecuador because a democratically-elected president has recently decided to start a new development project that would require ousting U.S. firms and employing local people rather than selling their land out from under them, but this person was conveniently blown out of the sky on his way to a meeting, then just happened to be replaced by a government that conveniently has the exact same ideas that our government does, and happens to want to sell land out from under indigenous peoples to U.S. firms in exchange for massive amounts of cash.
posted by odinsdream at 6:52 PM on September 18, 2008


Hi, I'm back. Didn't need to go the bookstore at all, because the book is right here.

Sorry, Blaze. It's just not a piece of journalism. The end notes comprise a bibliography, but it's exactly as I remember it -- none of the notes reference anything the author actually did or any interviews he performed.

And so I hope you don't backpedal by saying the book doesn't contain research that meets your criteria. Because that would be pretty fucking lame.

Why? I assert it's a novelized account set against the backdrop of some real events. And it is. Do you think Gone With the Wind is a scholarly work about the Civil War? Funny, I keep looking for Rose Dawson on the list of survivors of the Titanic, but she doesn't seem to be there...

You guys don't have any critical thinking skills, do you?

Other sources, including articles in the New York Times and Boston Magazine, as well as a press release issued by the United States Department of State, have referred to a lack of documentary or testimonial evidence to corroborate the claim that the NSA was involved in his hiring to Chas T. Main. In addition, the author of the State Department release states that the NSA "is a cryptological (codemaking and codebreaking) organization, not an economic organization" and that its missions do not involve "anything remotely resembling placing economists at private companies in order to increase the debt of foreign countries."

Sigh. Can I sell you a bridge?
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 7:57 PM on September 18, 2008


What if you wrote a novelized book about the president meeting last week ...

I don't know. If I say it's true, will you believe me?

Is there anything else I can say is true that you'll believe me? You know, I walked by the White House once. Even stopped a took a picture. Clearly, I have credentials as someone with a great deal of White House experience. I think you should give me $20 because it'll make you smarter.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 8:00 PM on September 18, 2008


Sounds a bit like the shell game. Y'know, if you can get folks answering the wrong questions...

f'rinstance. If you're secretly spying on people - why would you let them know? I'm thinking of Total Information Awareness and their wholly unfortunate logo - all this, etc. etc. etc. - the general gist.
Much like the point of torture is not to derive information, so too only targeted covert surveillance is really effective in getting relevant information.
Certainly one can fish, and maybe catch something, and maybe it's valuable information, but on its own it's a complete inversion of how to develop a good investigation.
And ultimately antithetical to democracy (you don't initiate investigations on people without cause...I believe that's written down somewhere).

So why tell the world, eh? (to invert Dr. Strangelove).

Obviously then the focus is intimidation.
I mean, the canard "if you've got nothing to hide" implies that everyone has something to hide. Maybe I jerk off to banjo music. Doesn't mean I want my neighbors hearing about it.
Therefore, implicit in that is the notion that the information will be used against you, just not, perhaps, in court.
Nobody really thinks anything derived from this could be used in court (as our laws sit now, of course).
And indeed - by extension in the implication - terrorists (or those deemed enemy combatants - let's face it, enemies of the state) won't get their day in court anyway.
It's a big tautology sammich. With intimidation of the masses and the spread of hopelessness, despair and fear in the masses as its goal.

Honestly, has anything corporate America done in the last, say, 20 years, that isn't designed to subvert democracy?
I'm not saying folks can't make a buck - but it's not really about folks. It's about systems (and maybe a very very tiny few folks at the top of it).
posted by Smedleyman at 8:37 PM on September 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


You guys don't have any critical thinking skills, do you?

You don't have a shred of honesty in you, do you?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:17 PM on September 18, 2008


*adds infini to watch list*
posted by homunculus at 5:24 PM on September 18


what again? you know what a pain it was getting off?
posted by infini at 5:26 AM on September 19, 2008


EFF Sues NSA, President Bush, and Vice President Cheney to Stop Illegal Surveillance
posted by homunculus at 11:10 AM on September 19, 2008


Attorney General Pulls Immunity Trigger, Denies 'Dragnet' Surveillance
posted by homunculus at 2:05 PM on September 21, 2008


this thread made me buy the book "confessions of an economic hitman" at the airport couple of days ago and I must say it seems to make sense in the context of books written on international aid and globalization by sieglitz, sachs, easterly et al
posted by infini at 6:15 AM on September 24, 2008


Feingold Fights Search And Seizure Of Our Laptops
posted by homunculus at 9:12 AM on September 30, 2008


Surveillance of Skype Messages Found in China
posted by homunculus at 10:16 AM on October 2, 2008


New surveillance program will turn military satellites on US
posted by homunculus at 1:37 PM on October 6, 2008


google eye view eh?
posted by infini at 1:52 PM on October 6, 2008


Data-Mining for Terrorists Not 'Feasible,' DHS-Funded Study Finds
posted by homunculus at 2:49 PM on October 8, 2008


Despite pledges by President George W. Bush and American intelligence officials to the contrary, hundreds of US citizens overseas have been eavesdropped on as part of the U.S. terrorist surveillance program, according to two former military intercept operators who say they listened to private phone calls, even phone sex, of US soldiers in Iraq calling home.
posted by homunculus at 10:17 AM on October 9, 2008


« Older Deletionpedia...  |  Typographunnies... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments