thought
Tags
- privacy
- snowden
- nsa
- listening
- agitprop
- propaganda
Comments
Mark de LA says
M 2013-06-11 10:58:40 16564
seth 2013-06-11 07:58:19 16564
Perhaps the threat from terrorist in our country are no longer quite so very terrifying and perhaps we should repeal the legislation that allows the government to gather information about us.
Tell that to the 3 who died & the hundreds maimed in the Boston Marathon Bombing. 
Mark de LA says
NOPE! Things are actually going in the opposite direction with the government, as ever, not wasting a crisis perceived, created or otherwise to control more of our lives:
Bill Would Require DriverS To Give Police Their Cell Phones Without Warrant...
HHS Wraps Up 'Health Datapalooza IV'...
Obama: 'We Don't Want to Tax ALL Businesses Out of Business'...
Audio: IRS agent tells pro-life group: 'Keep your faith to yourself'...
TRANSCRIPT...
UPDATE: Soldier Who Read Conservative Books Faces Charges...
Democrats Love Gov't Surveillance -- As Long As It's Obama, Not Bush...
ETC.
(DRUDGE headlines):
IRS Buying Spying Equipment: Covert Cameras in Coffee Trays, Plants...Bill Would Require DriverS To Give Police Their Cell Phones Without Warrant...
HHS Wraps Up 'Health Datapalooza IV'...
Obama: 'We Don't Want to Tax ALL Businesses Out of Business'...
Audio: IRS agent tells pro-life group: 'Keep your faith to yourself'...
TRANSCRIPT...
UPDATE: Soldier Who Read Conservative Books Faces Charges...
Democrats Love Gov't Surveillance -- As Long As It's Obama, Not Bush...
ETC.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-11 09:12:31 16564
It is strange and peculiar to me that you say "NOPE!" ... Nope to what? The question i posed was about what we should do. Are you saying that we should not repeal the Patriot act ... and are you saying that the threat of terrorism justifies the government collecting data about all of us? Are you still so very terrified about being bombed that you want the government to do whatever it can to prevent that?
M 2013-06-11 08:47:51 16564
NOPE! Things are actually going in the opposite direction with the government, as ever, not wasting a crisis perceived, created or otherwise to control more of our lives:
It is strange and peculiar to me that you say "NOPE!" ... Nope to what? The question i posed was about what we should do. Are you saying that we should not repeal the Patriot act ... and are you saying that the threat of terrorism justifies the government collecting data about all of us? Are you still so very terrified about being bombed that you want the government to do whatever it can to prevent that?
None of the above. Prosecute traitors as traitors. Don't lionize them as heros & publish all the secrets they disclose. When a person works for a business which does classified work they sign agreements which makes them aware of all the statutes against disclosing classified data & information - to wit: the disclosure of which will harm to severly harm the people of this country or the nation as a whole. Whether this is a case of that is yet to be determined.
Seth says
Well it seems even you have argued on both sides of this dilemma ...
M 2013-06-11 11:40:03 16564
M 2013-06-11 10:58:40 16564
seth 2013-06-11 07:58:19 16564
Perhaps the threat from terrorist in our country are no longer quite so very terrifying and perhaps we should repeal the legislation that allows the government to gather information about us.
Tell that to the 3 who died & the hundreds maimed in the Boston Marathon Bombing.
Well it seems even you have argued on both sides of this dilemma ...
source: mark's comment 2012-06-05 07:03:30
"It begins to look like the old dichotomy liberty/freedom -VS- security. Do I want more police cars around & more police nearby ensuring my safety? or Do I want to live in peace without being watched all the time. What happens if the nanny state begins to pass laws that are really stupid? As with all matters balance is required. New technology may require new rules as with drone wars, predators & terrorists redefining "war". The Fourth Amendment applies strongly. With being watched all the time where does the "right to privacy" go?"
"It begins to look like the old dichotomy liberty/freedom -VS- security. Do I want more police cars around & more police nearby ensuring my safety? or Do I want to live in peace without being watched all the time. What happens if the nanny state begins to pass laws that are really stupid? As with all matters balance is required. New technology may require new rules as with drone wars, predators & terrorists redefining "war". The Fourth Amendment applies strongly. With being watched all the time where does the "right to privacy" go?"
... which just goes to prove that this is a complex problem involving many considerations and it is easy to become confused. It does not feel wise to me to support government collection of private data just because democrats are currently in charge of the administration ... nor does it feel wise to me to support prosecution of leakers of secrets just because there is a law against it. Context is king ... what is the best thing to do in this particular now ... considering both history and the future ... and the current spirtit of the thing ... and the current direction of the swing of the pendulum.
Hence, I think it is time to bark back the government's surveillance of the population ... let them go back to specific warrants.
Hence, I think it is time to bark back the government's surveillance of the population ... let them go back to specific warrants.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-11 10:24:02 16564
Well i don't think "Obama wants this spying on the people" as you put it. And i don't think you have any evidence to support that opinion. Oh sure, Obama, does not want more terrorist attacks on his watch ... and i think he will follow the advise he gets from the security machine to prevent it. But it is hard to distinguish the former from the latter. That is the problem we are having.
I actually think it is good that this has come up now at this stage in the history our country. I also want it to be resolved and not swept under the rug allowing then the overreach of security to continue to infringe on our personal freedom. But demonizing specific people like Snowden and Obama will not help us make the changes we (probably both) want.
M 2013-06-11 09:45:41 16564
President Obama & the VP are the only ones (along with their designees) are the only ones allowed by statute to unclassify previously classified information. Not the pollitical hacks on the left. I think Obama wants this spying on the people. Stalin & the Soviets liked it. China never gave it up. Hitler did it. ....
Well i don't think "Obama wants this spying on the people" as you put it. And i don't think you have any evidence to support that opinion. Oh sure, Obama, does not want more terrorist attacks on his watch ... and i think he will follow the advise he gets from the security machine to prevent it. But it is hard to distinguish the former from the latter. That is the problem we are having.
I actually think it is good that this has come up now at this stage in the history our country. I also want it to be resolved and not swept under the rug allowing then the overreach of security to continue to infringe on our personal freedom. But demonizing specific people like Snowden and Obama will not help us make the changes we (probably both) want.
The machinery IS in place & it is at your side like Dianne Feinstein on the United States Senate Select committee on Intelligence who claimed the other day that none of this is happening. I demonize traitors! Your side can't tell the difference!
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-11 22:28:17 16564
You really do disgust me when you start running this "your side" shit. But, hey, if you want to go there ... "your side" is not demonizing Snowden at all ... rather they are hailing him as a hero. Of course the Obama administration must needs prosecute him as a traitor ... apparently that is what you would do as well.
All of that aside, there is another aspect of this that has not received much attention. Where Snowden ends up may be super critical. He certainly has information that would be of interest to the Chinese or the Russians. Keeping that kind of information secret from these other governments is certainly in the best interests of the United States. If Obama granted him a pardon, then he could return to this country and not need to seek asylum in a country which will certainly interrogate him. Think about it ... contemplate if signing this petition would be a wise step.
M 2013-06-11 10:32:17 16564
seth 2013-06-11 10:24:02 16564
Well i don't think "Obama wants this spying on the people" as you put it. And i don't think you have any evidence to support that opinion. Oh sure, Obama, does not want more terrorist attacks on his watch ... and i think he will follow the advise he gets from the security machine to prevent it. But it is hard to distinguish the former from the latter. That is the problem we are having.
I actually think it is good that this has come up now at this stage in the history our country. I also want it to be resolved and not swept under the rug allowing then the overreach of security to continue to infringe on our personal freedom. But demonizing specific people like Snowden and Obama will not help us make the changes we (probably both) want.
M 2013-06-11 09:45:41 16564
President Obama & the VP are the only ones (along with their designees) are the only ones allowed by statute to unclassify previously classified information. Not the pollitical hacks on the left. I think Obama wants this spying on the people. Stalin & the Soviets liked it. China never gave it up. Hitler did it. ....
Well i don't think "Obama wants this spying on the people" as you put it. And i don't think you have any evidence to support that opinion. Oh sure, Obama, does not want more terrorist attacks on his watch ... and i think he will follow the advise he gets from the security machine to prevent it. But it is hard to distinguish the former from the latter. That is the problem we are having.
I actually think it is good that this has come up now at this stage in the history our country. I also want it to be resolved and not swept under the rug allowing then the overreach of security to continue to infringe on our personal freedom. But demonizing specific people like Snowden and Obama will not help us make the changes we (probably both) want.
The machinery IS in place & it is at your side like Dianne Feinstein on the United States Senate Select committee on Intelligence who claimed the other day that none of this is happening. I demonize traitors! Your side can't tell the difference!
You really do disgust me when you start running this "your side" shit. But, hey, if you want to go there ... "your side" is not demonizing Snowden at all ... rather they are hailing him as a hero. Of course the Obama administration must needs prosecute him as a traitor ... apparently that is what you would do as well.
All of that aside, there is another aspect of this that has not received much attention. Where Snowden ends up may be super critical. He certainly has information that would be of interest to the Chinese or the Russians. Keeping that kind of information secret from these other governments is certainly in the best interests of the United States. If Obama granted him a pardon, then he could return to this country and not need to seek asylum in a country which will certainly interrogate him. Think about it ... contemplate if signing this petition would be a wise step.
I am not locked into a particular side on this one. I have a very good grasp of national security which you do not, Seth. It is not conditioned by partisanship but by jobs held in military service which may be classified. I have no respect for Snowjob at all. There are, as I have said above somewhere, ways to achieve a balance between security & liberty & a way to achieve recognition of what harms the current government is doing to the Bill of Rights. This turd just has an ego to stroke, celebrity to play with - not worth anymore of my time or focus. Another aspect is that the M$M can now get sidetracked from all the other scandals the administration facing.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-12 09:48:29 16564
source: Ron Paul
"The government does not need to know more about what we are doing. We need to know more about what the government is doing. We need to turn the cameras on the police and on the government, not the other way around."
... 
Yep I responded on facebook thus:
Me on Seth on Facebook: ...
Tend to like this although RP is as shaky as Ross Perot in some dimensions. I liked some of both.
Tend to like this although RP is as shaky as Ross Perot in some dimensions. I liked some of both.
If government spying is so effective how come they claim they don't
know where all the illegal aliens are? - need to grant them amnesty
first to know who they are?
...
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-12 09:45:36 16564
So you have actual knowledge of the NSA's use of data?
MR 2013-06-12 09:43:30 16564
seth 2013-06-12 09:08:57 16564
hmmm ...
hmmm ...source: Mark above
"I have a very good grasp of national security which you do not, Seth. "
"I have a very good grasp of national security which you do not, Seth. "
... it seems that thought is kind of shaping your responses.
Yep, knowledge rather than blather of one talking out his/her ass!
So you have actual knowledge of the NSA's use of data?
I have actual knowledge of how the security system works. I taught it at one point. Security is a concern of the entire government from the president down, not just the NSA.
Mark de LA says
MR 2013-06-12 09:43:30 16564
seth 2013-06-12 09:08:57 16564
hmmm ...
hmmm ...source: Mark above
"I have a very good grasp of national security which you do not, Seth. "
"I have a very good grasp of national security which you do not, Seth. "
... it seems that thought is kind of shaping your responses.
Yep, knowledge rather than blather of one talking out his/her ass!
Then, too, I also have a copy of the U.S. Constitution just one click away with commentary from lawyers : http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/
don't need no stinking experience or bill of rights, eh bro?
don't need no stinking experience or bill of rights, eh bro?
Seth says
ok it is now clear to me that you have one agenda: to judge people who leak government secrets to the public.
Have fun with your agenda ... to me, it is not interesting. Government overreach ... now that is something that gets my juices flowing.
MR 2013-06-12 10:26:59 16564
seth 2013-06-12 10:10:38 16564
There are two separate issues here for me:
- Snowden's "crime" and the government's and media's response to that. Was it justified? What actual damage did it do to our security except for disclosing #2?
- The NSA collecting billions of phone records of people who are not even suspected of crimes. Is this necessary to protect us from terrorists? Is it effective? Is it a slippery slope leading eventually to government oppression?
These are entirely different concerns. Me, i think we need to understand 2 before we can judge 1. Personally i don't want Snowden's crime to distract the country from understanding what is happening (or perhaps not happening) with 2.
I don't think it is useful for us to do a random walk of partisan bickering without even knowing which item is of concern.
Apparently Wikileaks Assange & Cpl. Manning thought the same thing as you did then.
Cries of partisan are just #agitprop and #propaganda & should be stuffed up your ass.
Cries of partisan are just #agitprop and #propaganda & should be stuffed up your ass.
ok it is now clear to me that you have one agenda: to judge people who leak government secrets to the public.
Have fun with your agenda ... to me, it is not interesting. Government overreach ... now that is something that gets my juices flowing.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-12 10:10:38 16564
There are two separate issues here for me:
- Snowden's "crime" and the government's and media's response to that. Was it justified? What actual damage did it do to our security except for disclosing #2?
- The NSA collecting billions of phone records of people who are not even suspected of crimes. Is this necessary to protect us from terrorists? Is it effective? Is it a slippery slope leading eventually to government oppression?
These are entirely different concerns. Me, i think we need to understand 2 before we can judge 1. Personally i don't want Snowden's crime to distract the country from understanding what is happening (or perhaps not happening) with 2.
I don't think it is useful for us to do a random walk of partisan bickering without even knowing which item is of concern.
Apparently Wikileaks Assange & Cpl. Manning thought the same thing as you did then.
Cries of partisan are just #agitprop and #propaganda & should be stuffed up your ass.
Cries of partisan are just #agitprop and #propaganda & should be stuffed up your ass.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-06-12 10:44:21 16564
ok it is now clear to me that you have one agenda: to judge people who leak government secrets to the public.
Have fun with your agenda ... to me, it is not interesting. Government overreach ... now that is something that gets my juices flowing.
MR 2013-06-12 10:26:59 16564
seth 2013-06-12 10:10:38 16564
There are two separate issues here for me:
- Snowden's "crime" and the government's and media's response to that. Was it justified? What actual damage did it do to our security except for disclosing #2?
- The NSA collecting billions of phone records of people who are not even suspected of crimes. Is this necessary to protect us from terrorists? Is it effective? Is it a slippery slope leading eventually to government oppression?
These are entirely different concerns. Me, i think we need to understand 2 before we can judge 1. Personally i don't want Snowden's crime to distract the country from understanding what is happening (or perhaps not happening) with 2.
I don't think it is useful for us to do a random walk of partisan bickering without even knowing which item is of concern.
Apparently Wikileaks Assange & Cpl. Manning thought the same thing as you did then.
Cries of partisan are just #agitprop and #propaganda & should be stuffed up your ass.
Cries of partisan are just #agitprop and #propaganda & should be stuffed up your ass.
ok it is now clear to me that you have one agenda: to judge people who leak government secrets to the public.
Have fun with your agenda ... to me, it is not interesting. Government overreach ... now that is something that gets my juices flowing.
Sorry DUDE, that's righteously funny ... coming from your weak voice already up your ass. Obamacare, IRS scandals, Environmentalism everywhere, Union control of private company contrary to bankruptcy laws ...... (to infinity & beyond). Read my writings here on Big Government & then return to your hamock within your rectum.
Mark de LA says
Story is unraveling: NSA surveillance played little role in foiling terror plots, experts say...
Is story unravelling? GUARDIAN's scoop 'looking bit dodgy'...
Obama, 9 PRISM Partners Targeted by Class-Action Lawsuit...
Hentoff: This is America?
EU warns US of 'grave consequences'...
Is story unravelling? GUARDIAN's scoop 'looking bit dodgy'...
Obama, 9 PRISM Partners Targeted by Class-Action Lawsuit...
Hentoff: This is America?
EU warns US of 'grave consequences'...
More explosive details on US surveillance targets...
TALKS WITH SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST NEWSPAPER...
Steps he claims US took since he broke cover...
His plans for the immediate future...
His fears for his family...
Will fight extradition...
LET HONG KONG DECIDE...
Not hiding...
'I'M NEITHER TRAITOR NOR HERO. I'M AN AMERICAN'
TALKS WITH SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST NEWSPAPER...
Steps he claims US took since he broke cover...
His plans for the immediate future...
His fears for his family...
Will fight extradition...
LET HONG KONG DECIDE...
Not hiding...
'I'M NEITHER TRAITOR NOR HERO. I'M AN AMERICAN'
Mark de LA says
This crisps it up!!!!!
This crisps it up!!!!!
Mark de LA says
Consequences of exposure of classified methods & procedures maybe?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/14/terrorists-change-behavior-after-leaks-lawmaker-says/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/14/terrorists-change-behavior-after-leaks-lawmaker-says/
Seth says
... More revelations from Snowden.
XKeyscore: NSA tool collects nearly everything a user does on the internet
though apparently it's only accessed in response to a specific investigation.
XKeyscore: NSA tool collects nearly everything a user does on the internet
though apparently it's only accessed in response to a specific investigation.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-07-31 11:04:13 16564
... More revelations from Snowden.
XKeyscore: NSA tool collects nearly everything a user does on the internet
though apparently it's only accessed in response to a specific investigation.
XKeyscore: NSA tool collects nearly everything a user does on the internet
though apparently it's only accessed in response to a specific investigation.
What happens if low level analysts try to access the actual phone records & other electronic shit?
Yahoo News: ...
Despite the field for a justification, the "request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed," says Greenwald. Then, this next screen pops up and "the analyst then selects which of those returned emails they want to read by opening them in NSA reading software," explains Greenwald.
Further slides reveal that the NSA can do this with all sorts of other communications, like Facebook chat, and presumably the other tech companies the government works with, like Microsoft, which owns Skype:
...
Seth says
... mark asks: What happens if low level analysts try to access the actual phone records & other electronic shit? ...
mark asks: What happens if low level analysts try to access the actual phone records & other electronic shit? ...source: guardian reporting from snowdens disclosures
training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.
training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.
... apparently all they need do is to enter a broad justification in a web form, then the next screen allows the analyst to read the information.
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, should telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, should telling that to the American People be a crime?
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-07-31 11:33:40 16564
... mark asks: What happens if low level analysts try to access the actual phone records & other electronic shit? ...
mark asks: What happens if low level analysts try to access the actual phone records & other electronic shit? ...source: guardian reporting from snowdens disclosures
training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.
training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.
... apparently all they need do is to enter a broad justification in a web form, then the next screen allows the analyst to read the information.
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, should telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, should telling that to the American People be a crime?
Like I said somewhere, deleted?, it depends upon whether it is helpful to terrorists or our enemies (whether it is a crime). We have oversight committee meetings to review the procedures which meet under classified conditions. The restraints should be both public & classified depending upon the sources & methods sensitivity.
Seth says
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
M 2013-07-31 15:12:37 16564
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
Like I said somewhere, deleted?, it depends upon whether it is helpful to terrorists or our enemies (whether it is a crime). We have oversight committee meetings to review the procedures which meet under classified conditions. The restraints should be both public & classified depending upon the sources & methods sensitivity.
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-07-31 17:48:16 16564
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
M 2013-07-31 15:12:37 16564
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
Like I said somewhere, deleted?, it depends upon whether it is helpful to terrorists or our enemies (whether it is a crime). We have oversight committee meetings to review the procedures which meet under classified conditions. The restraints should be both public & classified depending upon the sources & methods sensitivity.
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
In that sense it doesn't matter then.
Seth says
in what sense does what not matter ... and how did that follow from anything that i said?
how our society meets out justice certainly does matter. becoming aware of what our government is doing certainly does matter.
M 2013-07-31 22:53:06 16564
seth 2013-07-31 17:48:16 16564
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
M 2013-07-31 15:12:37 16564
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
Like I said somewhere, deleted?, it depends upon whether it is helpful to terrorists or our enemies (whether it is a crime). We have oversight committee meetings to review the procedures which meet under classified conditions. The restraints should be both public & classified depending upon the sources & methods sensitivity.
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
In that sense it doesn't matter then.
in what sense does what not matter ... and how did that follow from anything that i said?
how our society meets out justice certainly does matter. becoming aware of what our government is doing certainly does matter.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-08-01 06:53:59 16564
in what sense does what not matter ... and how did that follow from anything that i said?
how our society meets out justice certainly does matter. becoming aware of what our government is doing certainly does matter.
M 2013-07-31 22:53:06 16564
seth 2013-07-31 17:48:16 16564
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
M 2013-07-31 15:12:37 16564
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
Like I said somewhere, deleted?, it depends upon whether it is helpful to terrorists or our enemies (whether it is a crime). We have oversight committee meetings to review the procedures which meet under classified conditions. The restraints should be both public & classified depending upon the sources & methods sensitivity.
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
In that sense it doesn't matter then.
in what sense does what not matter ... and how did that follow from anything that i said?
how our society meets out justice certainly does matter. becoming aware of what our government is doing certainly does matter.
None of this matters: it's all political shit! (picture on request)
Already Always Listening™
In the Already Always Listening™ segment, we visit the notion that
while we think of ourselves as open-minded and objective, in fact our
approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas—by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
In this session, we see those filters for what they are—an
all-pervasive influence that profoundly colors our relationships with
people, circumstances and even ourselves. An awareness of these filters,
and a recognition of the striking limits that they impose,
allows for a refreshing freedom. People, situations and our approach to life alter dramatically.
from Landmark Forum: Overview
http://www.landmarkworldwide.com/~/media/Files/PDF/overview_syllbs.pdf
Already Always Listening™
In the Already Always Listening™ segment, we visit the notion that while we think of ourselves as open-minded and objective, in fact our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas—by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
In this session, we see those filters for what they are—an all-pervasive influence that profoundly colors our relationships with people, circumstances and even ourselves. An awareness of these filters, and a recognition of the striking limits that they impose,
allows for a refreshing freedom. People, situations and our approach to life alter dramatically.
from Landmark Forum: Overview
http://www.landmarkworldwide.com/~/media/Files/PDF/overview_syllbs.pdf
In the Already Always Listening™ segment, we visit the notion that while we think of ourselves as open-minded and objective, in fact our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas—by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
In this session, we see those filters for what they are—an all-pervasive influence that profoundly colors our relationships with people, circumstances and even ourselves. An awareness of these filters, and a recognition of the striking limits that they impose,
allows for a refreshing freedom. People, situations and our approach to life alter dramatically.
from Landmark Forum: Overview
http://www.landmarkworldwide.com/~/media/Files/PDF/overview_syllbs.pdf
Mark de LA says
Perhaps you can get more of it from the post in FaceBook, maybe not. I took the Forum in 1988 at a different price and shortly after I finished Tony Robbins much more expensive seminars concluding with certification in NLP (NANLP) and a 48 foot firewalk. Had lots of fun w/ Tony.
Werner & LEC are at the opposite ends of the spectrum of transformation. Tony is into generating the feelings & juice necessary to get oneself into action on one's goals. Werner & the LEC leaders were into ontology & being.
A fixed way of listening to people can be described many ways. Some is part of one's survival/ego racket built over time & experience. WE (Werner Erhard) & LEC approach transformation from a "life is a conversation" point of view. If you always approach what another is saying with the mismatching metaprogram & enhance it with a playing dumb until the other person has exhausted all they can say about a topic then that is your already, always listening. You can then say that "my listening for you is that you need to explain whatever in great detail until I can mismatch something & then I will understand it & be able argue further.
I could say that my listening for you is that "you are somewhat brainwashed by your political point of view & lazy to think or find new solutions on your own & would rather they come from outside yourself so that you can play whack-a-mole with them."
Of course teasing such shit out is most likely a right-wrong-game invitation I learned from Michael Hadley first; (chief of staff for Tony).
There is a price paid for having each AAL (already always listening) & that is mostly intimacy & real communication, & true grokking (love?) will probably never show up. The language used by LEC to cure that is to "get off it!" - i.e. realize your AAL is a lie & make a stand not to create such things again.
Werner & LEC are at the opposite ends of the spectrum of transformation. Tony is into generating the feelings & juice necessary to get oneself into action on one's goals. Werner & the LEC leaders were into ontology & being.
A fixed way of listening to people can be described many ways. Some is part of one's survival/ego racket built over time & experience. WE (Werner Erhard) & LEC approach transformation from a "life is a conversation" point of view. If you always approach what another is saying with the mismatching metaprogram & enhance it with a playing dumb until the other person has exhausted all they can say about a topic then that is your already, always listening. You can then say that "my listening for you is that you need to explain whatever in great detail until I can mismatch something & then I will understand it & be able argue further.
I could say that my listening for you is that "you are somewhat brainwashed by your political point of view & lazy to think or find new solutions on your own & would rather they come from outside yourself so that you can play whack-a-mole with them."
Of course teasing such shit out is most likely a right-wrong-game invitation I learned from Michael Hadley first; (chief of staff for Tony).
There is a price paid for having each AAL (already always listening) & that is mostly intimacy & real communication, & true grokking (love?) will probably never show up. The language used by LEC to cure that is to "get off it!" - i.e. realize your AAL is a lie & make a stand not to create such things again.
Seth says
incidentally i personally am not cencerned with how the government is snooping on us right now. i am concerned with the slippery slope where politicians, impassioned by self righteousness, can make laws in the future to enforce political correctness on our society and the technology being made capable of enforcing those laws ... and of government agents capraciously enforcing those laws for their own profit. this NSA grab is a step in that direction. i think it is appropriate to push back against the tendency of America to go too far in that direction. the fear of terrorism does not justify that grab.
Mark de LA says
BTW when I took the Forum it was 4 very long days & many more distinctions than just the one we have been talking about.
Seth says
thanks i'll need to digest that over time.
i think most of "already, always listening" stuff we already dealt with under the topic of "listening for" ... too bad we didn't tag that conversation for retrieval here ... or perhaps it got deleted. if i remember correctly we ended up agreeing. And recognized that we each of us tend to listen just for things that we are motivated to respond to ... err, for whatever motivation ... rather than listen for what the other is intending to say. i agree, it is totally 
a good idea not to do that.
Did i miss anything really salient regarding that here?
thanks i'll need to digest that over time. i think most of "already, always listening" stuff we already dealt with under the topic of "listening for" ... too bad we didn't tag that conversation for retrieval here ... or perhaps it got deleted. if i remember correctly we ended up agreeing
. And recognized that we each of us tend to listen just for things that we are motivated to respond to ... err, for whatever motivation ... rather than listen for what the other is intending to say. i agree, it is totally a good idea not to do that.Did i miss anything really salient regarding that here?
Seth says
well actually i did study the form to find the edge that that i deemed important for me ... i posted it up there for you. as far as i can tell it is just rehash of thinking that has been around for a long time and gives their enterprise an excuse to charge you $125 for a seminar. I was actually wondering if you had gotten anything *new* from it. That was what i was asking you.
So what is new about some distinction called "already, always listening" to you?
If you don't care to take the time to write me how that has affected your thinking, then so be it. This consciousness will simply not be so informed. Is this just more of the same old rwg ... or is there is anything interesting for me here. I have no interest in the former ... the latter is what motivated me asking again.
M 2013-08-01 09:25:20 16564
seth 2013-08-01 09:23:09 16564
well apparently it is not something that is sufficiently salient in your thinking such that you can simply inform me in your own words. instead you just use it as an excuse to criticize me. oh well ... same as it ever was.
M 2013-08-01 08:23:28 16564
seth 2013-08-01 08:19:45 16564
what is the distinction "already, always listening" ?
incidentally me becoming informed by as many sources as possible, and then making up my own stuff and foisting it on others, is the only way i know how to participate in this consciousness. if you have discovered an alternative to that, could you please let me about it ?
and finally, i totally agree that politics today is shit and almost not worth paying any attention to ... at least the politics that is, so called "happening", on the national stage as reported by the media.
M 2013-08-01 07:42:11 16564
It is not about your shitty comment about Landmark, it is more about the distinction "Already, Always Listening" - which is a good one to master. I use ALL sources of knowledge & information as stepping stones for contemplation. I don't just make up my own shit & foist it on others. But, shoot your schtick = it may be fun for you. I am having less respect for politics these days. Nobody is listening & everyone is talking - a true cacophony of cackling opinion jockeys - yours & mine included. Solutions & new ideas - snuck not today says Farlem Fartalot!
what is the distinction "already, always listening" ?
incidentally me becoming informed by as many sources as possible, and then making up my own stuff and foisting it on others, is the only way i know how to participate in this consciousness. if you have discovered an alternative to that, could you please let me about it ?
and finally, i totally agree that politics today is shit and almost not worth paying any attention to ... at least the politics that is, so called "happening", on the national stage as reported by the media
. It is in the part of Werner's Post (already, always listening) that you knee-jerked past.
well apparently it is not something that is sufficiently salient in your thinking such that you can simply inform me in your own words. instead you just use it as an excuse to criticize me. oh well ... same as it ever was.
Proving that your lazy playing dumb is better than your reading ability.
well actually i did study the form to find the edge that that i deemed important for me ... i posted it up there for you. as far as i can tell it is just rehash of thinking that has been around for a long time and gives their enterprise an excuse to charge you $125 for a seminar. I was actually wondering if you had gotten anything *new* from it. That was what i was asking you.
So what is new about some distinction called "already, always listening" to you?
If you don't care to take the time to write me how that has affected your thinking, then so be it. This consciousness will simply not be so informed. Is this just more of the same old rwg ... or is there is anything interesting for me here. I have no interest in the former ... the latter is what motivated me asking again.
Seth says
ok, apparently what matters to you is to pay this landmark forum to teach you how to think ...
M 2013-08-01 06:58:18 16564
seth 2013-08-01 06:53:59 16564
in what sense does what not matter ... and how did that follow from anything that i said?
how our society meets out justice certainly does matter. becoming aware of what our government is doing certainly does matter.
M 2013-07-31 22:53:06 16564
seth 2013-07-31 17:48:16 16564
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
M 2013-07-31 15:12:37 16564
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
That actually is something that i think the American People should know. What kind of court restrainsts should be enforced is quite another question.
Then the question emerges, *should* telling that to the American People be a crime?
Like I said somewhere, deleted?, it depends upon whether it is helpful to terrorists or our enemies (whether it is a crime). We have oversight committee meetings to review the procedures which meet under classified conditions. The restraints should be both public & classified depending upon the sources & methods sensitivity.
well, of course, that is the same view as the Obama administration is taking.
me, i see a bit differently. inevitably it is for a jury to decide after they have been presented with the facts and the law. but what *should* be a crime is a matter of ethics and morality and is decided by citizens. this is a case where, if i was on the joury, i would let him off ... just like if i was on the Zimmerman jury, i would have voted for murder. perhaps we will see what happens, perhaps not.
In that sense it doesn't matter then.
in what sense does what not matter ... and how did that follow from anything that i said?
how our society meets out justice certainly does matter. becoming aware of what our government is doing certainly does matter.
None of this matters: it's all political shit! (picture on request)
Already Always Listening™
In the Already Always Listening™ segment, we visit the notion that while we think of ourselves as open-minded and objective, in fact our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas�"by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
In this session, we see those filters for what they are�"an all-pervasive influence that profoundly colors our relationships with people, circumstances and even ourselves. An awareness of these filters, and a recognition of the striking limits that they impose,
allows for a refreshing freedom. People, situations and our approach to life alter dramatically.
from Landmark Forum: Overview
http://www.landmarkworldwide.com/~/media/Files/PDF/overview_syllbs.pdf
Already Always Listening™
In the Already Always Listening™ segment, we visit the notion that while we think of ourselves as open-minded and objective, in fact our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas�"by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
In this session, we see those filters for what they are�"an all-pervasive influence that profoundly colors our relationships with people, circumstances and even ourselves. An awareness of these filters, and a recognition of the striking limits that they impose,
allows for a refreshing freedom. People, situations and our approach to life alter dramatically.
from Landmark Forum: Overview
http://www.landmarkworldwide.com/~/media/Files/PDF/overview_syllbs.pdf
In the Already Always Listening™ segment, we visit the notion that while we think of ourselves as open-minded and objective, in fact our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas�"by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
In this session, we see those filters for what they are�"an all-pervasive influence that profoundly colors our relationships with people, circumstances and even ourselves. An awareness of these filters, and a recognition of the striking limits that they impose,
allows for a refreshing freedom. People, situations and our approach to life alter dramatically.
from Landmark Forum: Overview
http://www.landmarkworldwide.com/~/media/Files/PDF/overview_syllbs.pdf
ok, apparently what matters to you is to pay this landmark forum to teach you how to think ... 
... me i like to think for myself. i determine what matters to me ... and what *should* matter to the society in which i live.
incidentally ...
incidentally ...
source: from the rap of the landmark forum
our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
our approach to ourselves, our circumstances and others is often
filtered and even obscured by pre-existing notions and ideas�"by our upbringing, our values, our past experiences.
... is certainly true. sounds like something i said several times myself in this forum.
So are you suddenly of a mind that politics does't "matter" anymore?
So are you suddenly of a mind that politics does't "matter" anymore?
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-08-01 09:23:09 16564
well apparently it is not something that is sufficiently salient in your thinking such that you can simply inform me in your own words. instead you just use it as an excuse to criticize me. oh well ... same as it ever was.
M 2013-08-01 08:23:28 16564
seth 2013-08-01 08:19:45 16564
what is the distinction "already, always listening" ?
incidentally me becoming informed by as many sources as possible, and then making up my own stuff and foisting it on others, is the only way i know how to participate in this consciousness. if you have discovered an alternative to that, could you please let me about it ?
and finally, i totally agree that politics today is shit and almost not worth paying any attention to ... at least the politics that is, so called "happening", on the national stage as reported by the media.
M 2013-08-01 07:42:11 16564
It is not about your shitty comment about Landmark, it is more about the distinction "Already, Always Listening" - which is a good one to master. I use ALL sources of knowledge & information as stepping stones for contemplation. I don't just make up my own shit & foist it on others. But, shoot your schtick = it may be fun for you. I am having less respect for politics these days. Nobody is listening & everyone is talking - a true cacophony of cackling opinion jockeys - yours & mine included. Solutions & new ideas - snuck not today says Farlem Fartalot!
what is the distinction "already, always listening" ?
incidentally me becoming informed by as many sources as possible, and then making up my own stuff and foisting it on others, is the only way i know how to participate in this consciousness. if you have discovered an alternative to that, could you please let me about it ?
and finally, i totally agree that politics today is shit and almost not worth paying any attention to ... at least the politics that is, so called "happening", on the national stage as reported by the media
. It is in the part of Werner's Post (already, always listening) that you knee-jerked past.
well apparently it is not something that is sufficiently salient in your thinking such that you can simply inform me in your own words. instead you just use it as an excuse to criticize me. oh well ... same as it ever was.
Proving that your lazy playing dumb is better than your reading ability.
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-08-01 10:43:55 16564
thanks i'll need to digest that over time.
i think most of "already, always listening" stuff we already dealt with under the topic of "listening for" ... too bad we didn't tag that conversation for retrieval here ... or perhaps it got deleted. if i remember correctly we ended up agreeing. And recognized that we each of us tend to listen just for things that we are motivated to respond to ... err, for whatever motivation ... rather than listen for what the other is intending to say. i agree, it is totally a good idea not to do that.
Did i miss anything really salient regarding that here?
thanks i'll need to digest that over time. i think most of "already, always listening" stuff we already dealt with under the topic of "listening for" ... too bad we didn't tag that conversation for retrieval here ... or perhaps it got deleted. if i remember correctly we ended up agreeing
. And recognized that we each of us tend to listen just for things that we are motivated to respond to ... err, for whatever motivation ... rather than listen for what the other is intending to say. i agree, it is totally a good idea not to do that.Did i miss anything really salient regarding that here?
Probably, but I lost the I lost interest in the context so am moving on to something else.
See Also
- Thought Hillary and Uma Aberdeen with 291 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Socretes Cafe Tuesday April 18 2017 with 140 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Agreements are vunerable to lies with 126 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought Different Kinds of Thoughts with 85 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought Listening with 36 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought #AntiTrumpPropaganda with 29 viewings related by tag "agitprop".
- Thought conversation with 15 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Are we more vunerable to propaganda? with 13 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought The 7% ers - Words Are a Waste of Time with 13 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Privacy is antithetical to the semantic web with 5 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Lies with 4 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Life Imitates Hollywood with 3 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought The Borg ? The Barge with 3 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Invasion Of Privacy At Fastblogit with 2 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought The Art of Listening with 2 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought A different view of the Snowden Affair with 2 viewings related by tag "nsa".
- Thought OBAMAGANDA with 2 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought & the beat goes on with 1 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought about: culture and the individual with 1 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought The Voice of Leadership with 1 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Sick Funny with 1 viewings related by tag "snowden".
- Thought Firefox Private Browsing Windows with 1 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Individual Privacy Opposes Us with 1 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Kids of America with 1 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Baghdad Bob -vs- D.C. Biden with 1 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought Identifying & Exposing Propaganda with 1 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought Different Viewpoints with 1 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Privacy with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought For all of you who think that Privacy is a Suicide Pact ! Look Below! with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought [title (18461)] with 0 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought There are two sides to this Privacy Issue with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought about: found here with 0 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought [title (19511)] with 0 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Secrecy vs Power vs Freedom with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Interesting Werner Thought with 0 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought Hope & Chains with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Evil Dude with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought about: He he. A little place to chat! with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Me represented in the Linked Data Cloud with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought Found on Facebook this AM (Citizenship Project) with 0 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought ~~ #privacy #opposes #a11y ~~ -- Bozo Faust with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought A different slant on the Right To Privacy with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought about: facial recognition tool works in darkness - bbc news with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought The Importance of Listening versus Speaking with 0 viewings related by tag "listening".
- Thought about: wing-nut conspiracy theorists have done it again: the truth about the planned parenthood hoax revealed - salon.com with 0 viewings related by tag "propaganda".
- Thought Let it be Said ... with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".
- Thought My choice of a facebook privacy Setting with 0 viewings related by tag "privacy".