Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Stop Watching Us

Now that will teach them.

Still, why not?

I do think, though, the lousy little low-intelligent contractors on the other side of the pond who for money would probably even sell their grandmothers will neither get stopped by their masters nor by their conscience due to a petition signed by 500,000 or several millions of MUPs (Most unimportant persons);  same goes for their British brothers in crime (GCHQ), and for any other secret service.

Alas! If at least they stopped to use the word 'intelligence' pertaining to their spooks. It's just ridiculous.

* * *

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
[The National Security Agency's] capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide.

Unwarranted government surveillance is an intrusion on basic human rights that threatens the very foundations of a democratic society.
Democracy requires an informed citizenry in order to function properly, and transparency and accountability are essential parts of that. That means knowing what our government is doing to us, in our name.


  1. Because they can they will, sadly it is inevitable.

  2. Probably not but it's still worth a try. Thank you for continuing to remind them.

    Stop watching us.

  3. One could also describe it this way, CherryPie:
    Because individuals who have forgotten respectively just don't care what it means to be a representative in a democracy, provide them with fantasillions of taxpayers' money in order to spy on their sovereign.
    Ha ha, did I write 'sovereign'?

    one could think what happened in 2001 offered certain people an ideal opportunity by proclaiming a so-called 'war on terror' to lay a smoke-screen upon their real intentions.
    By the way, I read somewhere that since 2002 20 people in the US died by the hand of terrorists, but 300,000 by 'ordinary' gun violence.

  4. However... I cannot for one moment imagine how anyone who sends their words down a wire or through a wifi system and on into internet server land could possibly imagine that they could safely assume their words might remain secret or private. Such naivety baffles me. I am not talking about "rights" and "wrongs", I am talking about realities. When email first began I was told by the chap who introduced it to me to "treat everything you write as if it was on the back of a postcard sent through the mail, that anyone who handles it in any form might be able to read." Wise words. Best to follow them and worry about more important things. The only safe secrets are the ones we keep inside our heads (and even then dementia will often let them out eventually).

  5. Totally agree with Andrew on that one.

    I resisted as long as I could to emails...but then nobody ever wrote to me anymore! Only the bill collectors....

    The spies and the listeners are despicable. But we write and talk too much...

  6. Ahah! If I may now draw on the discussion about partial quotation that has been ongoing at my place and at Cherie's for the past few days, I will now offer, and treasure, the following:

    "Totally agree with Andrew" - Claude


  7. However.... (for the 2nd time), I do have to disagree with the blanket "the spies and listeners are despicable" for I do believe, indeed I know, that there are innocent people walking the streets of my land today who would have been blown apart without those "despicable" workers doing their work.

    Actually, I distantly know a lady who works for intelligence services, who I knew a lot better many years ago, and who was prompted to embark on her career after her dear father was blown to pieces by a roadside bomb. And I don't care who listens to my communications on whatever side of any divide they belong to, because if I have some cause to promote then the only way to promote it is to get as many people as possible to read my words, and if I have some secrets to protect then (as I said above) I would not be so damn stupid as to sent them out into the internet. I find this whole kerfuffle very strange.

  8. Dear friend Andrew,
    Let me complete your quotation of my words. It was: "Totally agree with Andrew ON THAT ONE."

    It doesn't cover everything you say, everyday, everywhere.

    The action of spying and listening can be qualified in different ways, depending on who is doing it, and why it's being done.

  9. But were you not recently defending the use of a selective and edited quotation and the appearance of a question mark where it did not belong with crucial intervening words missed out? Thus I am now polishing and admiring a new quote:

    "Totally agree with Andrew...everything you say, everyday, everywhere." - Claude

    Keep 'em coming...

  10. I wasn't defending the use of a partial quotation.

    I was saying that the big fuss you made over it (and your putting down AGAIN the whole brainwashing bible) wasn't necessary.

    Thank GOD, He did not come down from Heaven to blast poor Cherie off for not quoting Him properly!

    Actually, the whole episode was fun till you threatened to vanish into the Black Hole forever and ever.

    Hope you come out soon. I can hardly wait for Cherie next Sunday Night post!

  11. Well of course HE didn't blast Cherie for not quoting Him properly, because he didn't write the silly book, or silly collection of silly books and silly stories, I should say. Sorry, I really do forget that some people really do believe that stuff is not the obvious invention of humans. Remarkable... But... If He existed I rather think, or hope, he'd have been blasting many many people for misusing his words and using them as justification for all manner of monstrosities and horrors. Now THEY, on the other hand... They... The Gods... THEY are too busy laughing at us...

    And you've put pressure on Cherie for next Sunday now, and on me for my reaction. I'll probably just be contrary in a different way and say,"Don't like the photo"

  12. ...and of course putting down the whole brainwashing bible again was necessary, to be very serious for a change... that will remain necessary, again and again and again... until the brainwashing stops and the brainwashed can stop becoming the brainwashers themselves in turn. That whole horrendous infectious cycle is very serious. Now I'm getting depressed just thinking about it.

  13. ...and referring to the specific quote that was referred to at Cherie's place... let me check... are there REALLY people out there who believe that their God wrote these words:

    "Doth not nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?"

    That is beyond parody, satire... Nope. I will have to lie down now and try not to think about it (and apologise to Sean for leading his comments stream way off topic, although... perhaps not... for does this God not spy on everybody and everything? He/She/It/They must get very weary, even of laughing. Goodnight.

  14. Why did I ever think that I might have the last word with you?

    I never got it with ma mère. And I never got it with my ex.

    Actually, the God (whom I know) is very annoyed at churches, and religion, and what-have-you-or-not, who have been using His name for years in horror stories.

    And that's my last words. If you still want to talk, you'll do it on your own. I'm bored to death by both sides for-or-against the bible.

    Don't be depressed about that subject. Not worth it. Life is too short. I'm going out for cake and coffee. That's something worth fighting and dying for.

  15. Ah... Cake and coffee... Things worth believing in... I hope that you enjoy. And thanks for likening me even in a tiny way to La Mère. I take it as a compliment even if it was not intended as such. Goodnight Dear Claude.

  16. She also likened you to her Ex my friend.

    Be afraid, and change your name, ad address, and appearance, and gender... (and don't worry, we'll always know where to find you [or do worry about that, actually])

  17. Oh dear...

    I see the black hole is still jiggling Andrew around. The Bible is not brainwashing it is a book. A book to explore, enjoy, dislike discuss or reject just as any other book.

    There are many things within the bible that correspond with scientific thinking. Some of it is a bit difficult to discover let alone understand, but it is there non the less.

    Brainwashing doesn't come from the Bible, that comes from Religions and the state promoting it as something other than it is.

    Oh yes and some of the translations are rather dodgy for various reasons.

    Now I will refer you back to some very wise words that JD quoted at my place ;-)


    “In the beginning was the word!”
    …..and that’s when all the trouble started.


    Oh!! and there is absolutely no pressure on me for my next Cherie's Place Thought comment. I know exactly which one I am going to post ;-)


    I am sorry Sean, for posting my reply here to a conversation that started elsewhere. It really has no relevance on your blog (except in response to the comments in your thread), I hope you will forgive me.

    And now it is time to wish you sweet dreams.


  18. "...A book to explore, enjoy, dislike discuss or reject just as any other book."

    Hah! Try telling that to the Brainwashers. Try telling it to about half the population of the USA, for example..., or the "nice" but oh so sinister ladies and fresh-faced gents of any Sunday School class... A book to discuss or reject just as any other book? Correct, of course, but... If only.

    (and I am not sorry Sean, for continuing a conversation here).

  19. Andrew,
    as currently I am not willing to take the time it would take trying to explain in detail why I am convinced that apart from some bromide you are wrong, and to spare you reading this, just the last three sentences:
    "If there was the wrong political change, it could be very dangerous. All you need is to have the wrong government in place. It is capable of abuse because there is no independent scrutiny."

    As for "quoting out of context": You are right.
    As for any desert religion: I am fed up to talk about.

    just one question: if your god 'is very annoyed at churches, and religion', why would you quote from that book? :)

    there is nothing to forgive. :)
    You're very welcome.

  20. Sean says: "If there was the wrong political change, it could be very dangerous. All you need is to have the wrong government in place. It is capable of abuse because there is no independent scrutiny."

    But you think a "wrong government" would not do the wrong thing anyway? No procedures or safeguards will protect us from "wrong government" because they will abolish and/or bypass them anyway. "Safeguards" in such things are, I think and illusion, a false sense of security, so it is better to assume they cannot be trusted. But of course, I do understand your point of view, and will move on accepting it for what it is.

    The Bible stuff is all just too silly to be worth debating. I am annoyed with myself every time I get sucked into talking about it. I annoy myself a lo in many ways, much more than any other person annoys me actually. I'll give myself a good talking to now.

  21. My bleedin' typo torrents such as in my previous comment annoy me too. Where is The Don to whack me on the head when I need him?

  22. Ah Sean, I've always been so bored with religious discussions, allow me to ignore your question, and bow out. I'm sorry I got involved. NEVER AGAIN.

  23. Andrew,
    first of all: I am glad you did not get annoyed with my ductus. Somehow, I do seem to have the talent to sound more aggressive than actually I am when disagreeing.

    Not Sean said. Sean quoted the last three sentences of a Guardian article..
    And Sean is pretty sure a 'wrong' government would do 'wrong' things.
    And Sean is of the opinion that we do already have 'wrong' governments.
    And Sean is pretty sure that a new Stalin, a new Hitler will / would be delighted to find such a marvellous infrastructure.

    Having written that, re your bleedin# typo torrents I don't give a toss. :)

    Still, I might enjoy to do what's the Don's – whacking you on your head ... whenever you feel the need.

  24. Andrew, Just Shut The F**K Up.

    Whack! (Oh, and Dulcinea sends another... Whack! And Apocalypse delivers unto you one big apocalyptic kick in the balls).

    Sorted now?


  25. Sorry, Claude,
    I just did not wish to resist. :)

  26. Amen is the beginning...

    It might need some research ;-)

  27. Ach ... hach ... CherryPie!

    Now we do need the help of some Suzies or Soo Sees, and JTs and ...

    Let's see ... :)

  28. Neighhhhhhhh.....

    And I am coming to get you all.

    Believe me.

  29. We will see one way or another...

    I think that is the point ;-)

  30. You might be coming Apocalypse, certainly you will be going after having been whacked on you head.

    Yep, CherryPie.

  31. Nope CherryPie. I will get you before you even know I have got you. Shame nobody can ever be woken from oblivion, just for a moment, to be told, "See. There is nothing."