Hello Alexander,
RW>>>>> He's tried to keep his information from being revealed, but that
RW>>>>> may not last, depending on who has that information now.
ak>>>>> This information is just a scandalous information which tells
ak>>>>> the world about methods of NSA and other similar organizations.
ak>
AK>>> Anyway, Snowden did his best. If we think it over, the logic is
AK>>> simple. The state must NOT have full control of its citizens. The
AK>>> state must not have power to suppress all clandestine activity.
AK>>> The state must not develop such technical instruments that make
AK>>> clandestine activity impossible. Because it is a matter of
AK>>> democracy survival.
BK>> All true, and irrelevant. Any state that wants that control will
BK>> develop the technology to give it that control. The only answer is
BK>> to develop an electorate that will kick out any government that
BK>> tries to gain that much control.
BK>> Dictatorships will try, and all that will stop them is their
BK>> inability to do so, or a populous that will overthrow them.
AK>
ak> Such things have been very possible until technology was not too
ak> high. It is like Vietnam war - the victorious Vietnamese resistance had
ak> sense only when American technology to kill and spy was not at a very
ak> high level. The Vietnamese were able to defend themselves and kick out
ak> the Americans.
You've got it all wrong. The Americans won the war, not the
Vietnamese. That is why the Vietnamese call it The American War,
not The Vietnamese War. However, I must clarify a few things
about the war that you may not be aware of -
After the Americans won the war, the South Vietnamese Army went
on to lose it. How did the SVA manage that? It is really quite
easy to understand. The SVA were trained by the French, and the
SVA officers had lots of American money. When their brethren from
the North Vietnamese Army arrived, the privates in the SVA fled
into the hills without firing a shot, and the officers in the SVA
paid boat owners to take them to Hong Kong (and other exotic
destinations). Of course, the high command in the SVA had more
American money than everybody else and were able to buy a plane
ticket to America.
AK>But such a scenario now is very less probable.
Especially since the president of Vietnam says that Vietnam
today is very much like America.
AK>And such a scenario will be impossible in the near future, when
AK>the US technology to kill will be like an army of Terminators.
High tech breaks down easily, and in many cases does not work at all.
Not only that, but low tech can often get the job done twice as fast,
with minimal time needed to learn. Americans thought they could
take over and subdue the people of Afghanistan in a matter of weeks.
Ditto with the invasion of Iraq. However, even with the best equipped
and best trained army in the world, the American military was unable
to truly conquer either the people of Afghanistan or the people of
Iraq. Why? Because when Americans are finished doing what they do,
Americans go home, while the people in those countries never leave.
Germans are still in Germany, even after the Americans left.
Japanese are still in Japan, even after the Americans left.
Koreans are still in Korea, even after the Americans left.
Vietnamese are still in Vietnam, even after the Americans left.
Iraqis are still in Iraq, even after the Americans left.
Afghans will still be in Afghanistan, even after the Americans
have left. Yes, I know. We should have learned from Englishmen
and Russians, who also had to learn their lesson the hard way.
AK>Pay attention that all said above is just an allegory.
Say wha'? You made it all up? I don't believe you ...
AK>Vietnam war is a symbol of oppressive intentions;
French training and American money should never be mixed together ...
AK>there are many people who oppose them.
Money, especially American money, is the source of all evil.
And downright Satanic when mixed with French training.
AK>But a spying and military technology makes things differ with
AK>every year passing.
How many years did it take to bring Osama bin Laden to justice?
Even with all our spying and technology, it took us decades.
We got lucky being able to track one of ObL's couriers. And even
luckier to get a team inside the compound where ObL was holed up.
The point is, spying and technology only serve to make it easier
to do a task. And even then, there are problems, some of which
impossible to overcome.
AK>
ak> Is is a very wrong idea to suppose that special forces, secret
ak> services are consisted of usual people, and, therefore, they will never
ak> wring people's hands. In reality, such forces are mostly amoral, they
ak> are proud of their discipline and of their readiness to carry out any
ak> orders. They give an oath and they must obey. In addition, military
ak> people as a rule are not people of high intellect. Such people are not
ak> interested in politics, they easily can be persuaded that they do right
ak> things and save the country, whereas they actually oppress it. In Russia
ak> now, millions of strong, young, ignorant people are working in special
ak> forces (OMON), police - and it is very dangerous for democracy, because
ak> any public movement can be suppressed easily.
Soldiering is an honorable profession. Soldiers are not amoral,
but in a way must do their jobs in an amoral manner. I did not say
immoral. When inducted in the army, a soldier has to be taught to
kill - to do something totally against his/her true nature. The
soldier is sent off to war, to kill others. A most reprehensible
thought. When the soldier returns home, he/she often has no help
or support from his/her (military) family. The former soldier is
left to defend for himself/herself a way of life he/she has long
forgotten.
Many military people are highly intelligent. Especially the
officers, as they know better than to pick up a gun and march
into enemy territory. Better to let the 19-year-old privates
do that.
Some folks use the military as a means for getting into politics.
Serve a few years, get out, earn a few bucks, raise a family, run
for president. John F. Kennedy did that. So did Adolf Hitler.
Joe Stalin worked on a farm and lost a hand (or was it a thumb?),
so he can be forgiven. Ronald Reagan was smarter than them all,
making training films in the Army, as well as riding a horse.
Today in America we have a mercenary army. Nobody is drafted.
Some politicians want to change that. Not by re-instating the
draft, as that would be unpopular and get them kicked out of
office, but rather by passing a law mandating community service.
Using a carrot and stick approach, these politicans want to
encourage youngsters to join the military as their community
service, the trade-off being a free ticket to college after
completing their duties as Terminator. But I am getting
ahead of myself ...
AK>In short, I want to say that in future, an effective people's
AK>resistance can be as impossible as Vietnamese resistance if Vietnam
AK>war would happen in future.
No way Vietnam war can happen in future. No more French to train the
Vietnamese privates. French too old for that sort of thing. No more
American money to pay the Vietnamese officers. Americans have enough
problems paying their own bills.
AK>That's why a democratic society must prevent itself from being
AK>fully supervised, from having to a strong oppressive machinery.
Americans never want to think for themselves. Americans love
having others tell them what to do. Remember, Americans live in
a Nanny state, with Uncle Sam being the Nanny.
AK>>> Suppose, the state controls its people to such an extent, that it
AK>>> knows all people connections. This means that a member of
AK>>> clandestine organization cannot hide anywhere among his friends,
AK>>> acquaintances and even people with whom he once had a phone talk.
AK>>> Why it is
BK>> People do need to understand, clandestine does not automatically
BK>> mean illegal. It most certainly does not automatically mean
BK>> immoral. The WWII resistance movements, for example. Illegal but
BK>> not immoral. The secretive social groups, such as the Masons etc.
BK>> Clandestine, as keeping their internal activities secret, but not
BK>> illegal, and not immoral, as far as we know.
BK>> Then again, there are social groups that are fully clandestine, as
BK>> in keeping themselves secret, such as sexual swapping groups.
BK>> Immoral by common usage, but not illegal in many places.
BK>> Civil rights groups in the South during Jim Crow might be
BK>> clandestine, but not immoral, and not illegal under the US
BK>> constitution, no matter what local laws said.
AK>The point is that real freedom gives some people a chance to do some
AK>dirty tricks. It is true, but the question is - do you want to refuse
AK>from this real freedom so that to catch some more criminals?
There is no such thing as "real freedom" - unless you are a clockwork
orange. Alex and his friends went about town while singing in the rain
both inside and outside of people's homes. I do not suggest you try
that in Russia, or in America. Maybe in England, but only if you can
find a umbrella.
AK>
ak> If someone is ready to refuse, he thinks that punitive and spying
ak> measures is the key for getting good and justice society. It is like if
ak> God didn't give us freedom of choice, but strike every person who does
ak> wrong. Well, people, probably would commit less crimes. But it would be
ak> a society of liars and cowards, not a society of free, moral people.
The Fear Factor is what GWB (and now Obama) thought would keep
the people happy. After the events of 9-11, GWB kept crying wolf
thoughout his presidency, claiming terrorists were about to attack
us. Obama continued the trend after GWB left office. And you know
what? NO ACTS OF FOREIGN TERRORISM ON AMERICAN SOIL HAVE TAKEN PLACE
SINCE THE EVENTS OF 9-11.
There is no such society of free, moral people. Nor can there
ever be. Although I believe people are basically good, but capable
of evil, that does not mean any particular society is or can be
a free, moral people. Here is an example of what I mean -
In majority Muslim countries, Muslims divide themselves into two
groups - high Muslims and low Muslims. High Muslims is a term
describing Muslims who are religious, or good. Low Muslims is a
term describing Muslims who are not religious, or bad. A jihad,
or cleansing, ensues between these two groups so that there are
no more low Muslims. And then the high Muslims divide themselves
into two groups - high Muslims and low Muslims. The process
repeats itself et al infinitum until there is only one Muslim
left standing.
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." - Muslim proverb
AK>>> bad? Because clandestine activity is a holy cow of democracy. If
AK>>> some bustards came to power and they have
BK>> And that is key. Democracy has to allow people to keep secrets, as
BK>> long as they are not hurting others. Dictators will not allow
BK>> clandestine operations no matter what, so rules of morality aren't
BK>> relevant to them.
AK>Dictatorship is possible without any dictator. A group of people can
AK>fetch power and do with the country what they want.
The only true dictatorship possible is a benevolent dictatorship.
All other dictatorsips are government by committee.
AK>>> That's why NSA activity to trace all phone calls must be stopped,
AK>>> and its equipment and spy bases destroyed. It will, maybe, create
AK>>> some difficulties in catching real criminals. But it worth it. It
AK>>> provide freedom and democracy more chances for survival.
BK>> It's the fear of the smallest chance of hurt that drives people to
BK>> allow such loss of freedom.
AK>But real freedom demands some price.
Freedom is just another word for having nothing left to lose.
AK>But money must be from selling freedom.
Oh, freedom, freedom! Oh, freedom, freedom! No more Jim Crow ...
Oh, freedom over me! No more moaning ...
And before I'd be a slave, I'll be buried No more weeping ...
in my grave There'll be singing ...
And go home to my Lord and be free.
--Lee
--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
* Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)
|
