Originally Posted by Copperfield

Who is "we" and what consequences does this we face?

"Sorry we vaporized most of your family trying to kill your crazy uncle Dave, but if you get angry or try to retaliate for it we promise to finish off the rest of your family, neener neener?"

Does that sound like “accepting responsibility”? Our douchebag-in-chief won a peace prize for doing this shit. A peace prize.

Obviously, we doesn't include you as far as your beliefs and views are concerned.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

As I recall, the Death Star and it's captains, it's pilots, it's gunners, it's stormtroopers and it's various staff of non-combatants were eventually blown up with a couple of bombs that were released by Luke Skywalker.

I'd be careful posting that on a public forum, particularly one with the words terrorist, bomb, and muslim in it.

You wouldn't want Homeland Security taking you in for questioning, would you?

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

I'd be careful posting that on a public forum, particularly one with the words terrorist, bomb, and muslim in it.

You wouldn't want Homeland Security taking you in for questioning, would you?

Yah. Homeland security has those nasty little spherical interrogation droids with the sharp needles.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Chuck Berry agrees
http://youtu.be/n7qpavmyMU0

Vid of Chuck and Keith.


Prince

PS:

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Well, at least we're back on topic (violence).

I'm going to take this opportunity to retire from our conversation.

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Police have him (or someone anyway) cornered in a partially covered boat in a residential back yard.

*Edit*

Now in custody.

It's good to see that they were able to ID, locate, and ultimately, gain-custody of #2.
Looks like the FBI really had their hands-full; What an elusive little turd!


Prince

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

It's good to see that they were able to ID, locate, and ultimately, gain-custody of #2.
Looks like the FBI really had their hands-full; What an elusive little turd!


Prince

I'm surprised they didn't bring out the drones. Had he been in another country, they would have just bombed the area to kill him and consider the civilians collateral damage.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

It's good to see that they were able to ID, locate, and ultimately, gain-custody of #2.
Looks like the FBI really had their hands-full; What an elusive little turd!


Prince

Yes and now it's time for the all-important "question asking":

Who does #2 work for?

Let’s all hope that it isn’t this guy, or we are all screwed.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

As I recall, the Death Star and it's captains, it's pilots, it's gunners, it's stormtroopers and it's various staff of non-combatants were eventually blown up with a couple of bombs that were released by Luke Skywalker.

Yah. You make my point for me.

Thanks

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Yes and now it's time for the all-important "question asking":

Who does #2 work for?

Let’s all hope that it isn’t this guy, or we are all screwed.

YOU are, number one!

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Would you prefer that we become a nation of pansies and pushovers who are more easily controlled?

H-m-m-m. You come across as a perfect example of an armchair general. You like the idea of the fight, but prefer others do the dirty work on your behalf.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

We accept responsibility for accidently killing civilians with our bombs.

However, they are still very dead. If you think this is fair for us, then how will be react when the roles reverse ... which they will at some point.

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Who is "we" and what consequences does this we face?

"Sorry we vaporized most of your family trying to kill your crazy uncle Dave, but if you get angry or try to retaliate for it we promise to finish off the rest of your family, neener neener?"

Does that sound like “accepting responsibility”? Our douchebag-in-chief won a peace prize for doing this shit. A peace prize.

Yeah, I thought the Peace Prize thing was so overblown that Obama would refuse it. When he didn't I lost a huge amount of respect that I haven't regained since.

Originally Posted by Kepi

Tons of places are, but there's tons of apps and programs that negate the encryption. For a while, it was going pretty well, but with the proliferation of smart phones and the dedication of people who want to hear it, it's easily broken.

256-bit AES is unbreakable, for all practical purposes. Yes, youcan crack it, but not in anything approaching real time.

Originally Posted by Kepi ...

For the most part, it really doesn't matter, there are so many channels trunked into one station in any reasonably sized agency, that finding which channel has time sensitive information on it is pretty difficult and without location the appropriate channel, their transmissions get stomped over by routine traffic.

The real downside is that a lot of major agencies have gone plain language to increase interoperability between jurisdictions, and so immediate, personally sensative, information goes over the air and can be heard by anyone on main channels. So things people'd more or less like to keep private (say rectal bleeding or rape), are just broadcast for your nosey neighbor to know.

Project SAFECOM is one program DHS is doing right. Unfortunately, the funding will never match the need.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

256-bit AES is unbreakable, for all practical purposes. Yes, youcan crack it, but not in anything approaching real time.

Yes, but we're finally getting to the point where people use the standardized and tested algorithms over something developed in-house. There has been a long running commentary how "security through obscurity" does not work, but people think they can create an encryption method, not publish it, and it will stay magically secure.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Yah. You make my point for me.

Thanks

And your point was?

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

And your point was?

That your claim that the US 'accepts responsibility' for the innocents it makes it a policy to kill is no more than words on the wind. Responsibility is something that is just going to have to be forced on you.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

That your claim that the US 'accepts responsibility' for the innocents it makes it a policy to kill is no more than words on the wind. Responsibility is something that is just going to have to be forced on you.

Are you only going to try and force it on me or are you going try and force it on them at the same time as well?

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Are you only going to try and force it on me or are you going try and force it on them as well?

I'm perfectly content to aim to surround myself with decent people and to puncture lies and hypocrisy when I encounter them.

Are you familar with the rules of the street and the street itself and how the street and its rules actually work?

"But he did it too!" is a response wholly unbecoming an adult, and fundamentally destructive of a healthy society. Do wrong if you so choose (and we all people do from time to time, as we see fit). But don't lie about it to yourself -- don't commit evil and pretend it was anything but evil. It damages the capacity to distinguish and choose good in yourself and those around you.

Hurting innocents is wrong. When you do it, have the integrity to say, "I did wrong". If you would do it again, have the balls to say, "I will do wrong again".

Originally Posted by Justin '77

I'm perfectly content to aim to surround myself with decent people and to puncture lies and hypocrisy when I encounter them.


"But he did it too!" is a response wholly unbecoming an adult, and fundamentally destructive of a healthy society. Do wrong if you so choose (and we all people do from time to time, as we see fit). But don't lie about it to yourself -- don't commit evil and pretend it was anything but evil. It damages the capacity to distinguish and choose good in yourself and those around you.

Hurting innocents is wrong. When you do it, have the integrity to say, "I did wrong". If you would do it again, have the balls to say, "I will do wrong again".

What's wrong with killing known terrorists and people who are associated with terrorists in regions and areas that known to support terrorism and accepting those who may be innocent which is another question as casualties or victims of war? What's so right about them that makes it so wrong of us to kill them, support killing them or accept them getting killed? Have they done anything greater than commiting or supporting mass killings with a complete disregard as to who or what are being killed to deserve extensions of our sympathy or guilt?

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Yes and now it's time for the all-important "question asking":

Who does #2 work for?

I think George Harrison knew.
(That can be taken a number of ways!)


Prince

PS:

Originally Posted by Copper

Let’s all hope that it isn’t this guy, or we are all screwed.

LMAO! Hey; What can I say? "You fucked up; You trusted us."
(ie: The US Govt. under Nomad-leadership! ).

BTW, what we lack in "grace", we make-up for in "resiliency".
(IOW, it works itself out in "the end" ).

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

YOU are, number one!

No he's not. He's whomever he "wants to be"(ie: "is"), Silly.


Prince

PS: Eric, IIRC, you've stated before that The Prisoner is your favorite show?

Originally Posted by The Rani

They did show that turd who's boss didn't they.

They shoulda asked me to ID #2. I should know.
Plus, I know who he works for. I'm self-employed.


PoS!

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

No he's not. He's whomever he "wants to be"(ie: "is"), Silly.


Prince

PS: Eric, IIRC, you've stated before that The Prisoner is your favorite show?

Yes, It is.....

I guess we all know who #1 is, now, I guess.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev

But who is #1 now that he's dead?

New fodder for conspiracy theorists....

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

What's wrong with killing known terrorists and people who are associated with terrorists in regions and areas that known to support terrorism and accepting those who may be innocent which is another question as casualties or victims of war? What's so right about them that makes it so wrong of us to kill them, support killing them or accept them getting killed? Have they done anything greater than committing or supporting mass killings with a complete disregard as to who or what are being killed to deserve extensions of our sympathy or guilt?

If you want to establish that as your standard, be consistent with it. Per your standard, the death of 3000-someodd in New York a decade or so back was regrettable, but not wrongful. I somehow suspect, however, that you're not fine with that.

Which, if the case, means that the standard you are laying out by which you claim to want your actions judged is not one you actually hold or one you actually want applied as a standard. And we're back to a lack of integrity and the balls to be upfront and honest with others and with ourselves. Which is, as I mentioned above, a quality very much opposed to the sustenance of a healthy society.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

If you want to establish that as your standard, be consistent with it. Per your standard, the death of 3000-someodd in New York a decade or so back was regrettable, but not wrongful. I somehow suspect, however, that you're not fine with that...

Just to amplify on that: the nominal reason given by al Qaeda for attacking the WTC on 9/11 was to disrupt the American finance machne that controls the American war machine. Bin Laden considered American financiers to be evil, pure and simple.

In that respect, 9/11 is a nearly perfect corollary to our use of drones, albeit on a much larger scale. Which only goes to show that we should be very cautious of the examples we set or even ones we follow. We can disagree that the two are equivalent, but we'll have a difficult time selling the idea to others.