It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why are all the other sites similar to ATS being watched by the NSA, while ATS is not? Any ideas

page: 8
30
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


It's because ATS is a *JOKE* site.

There's nothing even vaguely "top secret" about this place.

It used to be a site where you could learn a bit of the truth. You used to be able to chat with people who knew the inner workings of the U.S, etc.

Now?

It's just a dumping ground for retarded right-wing Fox trolls and mental rejects that never even received their Grade 12.
edit on 3-8-2013 by VaterOrlaag because: (no reason given)


Seriously?

Why are YOU here, then?

That was some sort of Freudian slip, now wasn't it?




posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina
Ok it is now telling me that the NSA has been monitoring my cat website. So since when is a cats bowel habits and brand of cat food pertinent. Or is it the person running the site? Or is this add-on a joke? Opinions please?


It appears to monitor the links on a webpage, and throws a positive whenever there is a monitored embed. I've seen the icon pop up in embedded videos and the like from Google (monitored) rather than in the upper right corner of the whole page. YouTube is also on the "publicly announced as being monitored list", but it doesn't show on YouTube embeds at ATS in posts, because the full URL to the video isn't present in the post - just the part after the "=" sign.



So let me guess, using my constitutional right of free speech allows me to be monitored?


Why hell yeah! What good is free speech if it's NOT monitored? Of what value is saying something if no one listens?

There - I've done my good deed for the day. Where's my check, Uncle Sugar?


edit on 2013/8/8 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   


Seriously? Why are YOU here, then? That was some sort of Freudian slip, now wasn't it?
reply to post by nenothtu
 

Thank you for pointing out that point. The fact is that there still are people here that understand the inner workings of institutions in this country. I joined to let people know about the fraud that is being perpetrated upon students at many of the "higher" institutions of this country. I won't go into that on this thread, but I have done that in many threads over the years. In addition, I spend considerable time as a consultant to government agencies, and although many of the things I was involved with, had non-disclosure agreements attached, many did not. I can say with certainty that politicians, for the most part, have no idea what actually goes on, in the agencies that they "oversee". Unfortunately, for the American public, many, but not all of those agencies are run by second and third level management, and they are the REAL power brokers in this country. Much of what goes on, is hidden from the titular . of those agencies, for purposes of plausible deniability. That, of course, in not an excuse that the .s can rely upon, because it is their responsibility to find out what their agencies are doing, should it be an illegal act.
Especially troubling is the situation outlined in this thread, since the captured data of information, without any question, violates the Bill of Rights.



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


You know, that's the only fault I find in Snowden's disclosures - he had to violate an NDA to make them. In all honesty, though, I can't think of a way to make the disclosures without such violation, so I'm a little torn in the matter. On the one hand, what he did WAS a service to America, citizens and government alike. The citizens MUST be aware of government malfeasance, and for the government, wider awareness of abuses gives them at least a chance to address the grievances before the people drop the hammer on them. The NDA violation is the only thing about it that troubles me.

On the other hand, he only did to the government what the government and telecoms are doing to the citizens - intercepted their data and distributed it in a manner unauthorized by them. I don't know about you, but I consider the 4th and 5th Amendments to be a form of non-disclosure agreement. We are allegedly protected from unauthorized discovery of our persons, property, and "effects", and our data would seem to fall under the .ing of "effects", not to be violated by governmental fiat.

On balance, I think he did right despite the whining and sniping from the guilty parties in DC and around the nation.

There may well be some things which require secrecy in espionage legitimately, but our government classifies something on the order of 4000 items a DAY (the last time I checked, which was some time ago), most as a matter of course rather than out of a legitimate need for secrecy OR "in the interest of national security". Blanket classification is not much different from wholesale dragnet data collection on unsuspecting and innocent parties. Both serve nefarious purposes, and neither is justifiable by any stretch of a logical imagination. Hiding in the dark is generally an indicator that someone is up to no good, and our government is getting darker by the second despite spurious promises of "transparency".

The citizens ARE the nation, so "national security" would seem to dictate the security of the citizens from all threats, unjustifiable governmental intrusion included. You cannot protect the security of a thing by violating said security. "National security" cannot be legitimately used and an excuse to violate the security of a nation, as is being done daily.



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Too much reading...

They probably only read the short posts. Wait… Oh ****!


edit on 8-8-2013 by ConspiracyBuff because: face!



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus



If ATS were exclusively for 10 year-olds this would be the site where general consensus would be insisting Santa Claus is real and maybe the Easter Bunny too, though the Tooth Fairy appears to be a highly questionable parental conspiracy. We would be priding ourselves for having exposed The Great Pumpkin as a hoax story invented by cartoonist Charles Schulz and touting that as our great achievement toward exposing The Truth.
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 

Thanks a lot! Now you've ruined it. I thought Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy really existed. However, the biggest letdown is now knowing that The Great Pumpkin is fake.
Good Grief Charlie Brown!


Don't worry - they are ALL real. You've just run into disinfo from an agent paid to distribute it



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
By the way, there is one thing you can do to minimize NSA surveillance. You can stop using the internet, cancel all of your credit card accounts, cut up your "reward cards", stop using the US mail, your smart phones, land-line phones, and just about any other electronic means of communication. In other words, go completely off the grid. That is what Bin Laden did, and it worked for him for many years. It was one of his messenger runners that finally turned coat on him. Anyone willing to do that? The real question is, "Do you have something that the NSA is interested in, or are you just spouting things you have no intention of ever following through on? "It's not as simple an answer for most people, is it?


I still use the internet (TAILS, baby!), but I actually HAVE destroyed my credit cards, reward cards, bank account, lease agreements, utility contracts, etc. My internet access is via a "freenet", no contract or bill required. It just showed up one day, doubtless at the behest of the NSA
My phone doesn't seem to be all that smart ( I asked it what I wanted for dinner once, and it just stared at me - dumb phone!) and is under a different name... AND in an entirely different area code (hint: I'm not really living in the woods behind Langley, guys, nor in the woods behind Sugar Grove!)

I'm pretty much off the grid already, without a paper trail and a terribly tortured electron trail... but the IRS seems to find it curious that I don't make any money at all, either, and would probably like to have a word with me about that. Good luck finding the overpass I live under!



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold

I am gonna just take a wild guess and say the NSA had technology that would make your . spin if you ever had a chance to see it.



A common misconception, and an understandable one given the secrecy involved. Facts are, the secrecy is as much to keep you from finding out what they DON'T have as much as it is to keep you from discovering what they DO have. That way, you can let your imagination go wild and without solid justification fear, fear the Beast!



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 03:39 PM
link   
welp there is only one way to find out...releasing a string of flagged key words in 3...2...1...

nope.jpg



posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 08:14 PM
link   


On the other hand, he only did to the government what the government and telecoms are doing to the citizens - intercepted their data and distributed it in a manner unauthorized by them. I don't know about you, but I consider the 4th and 5th Amendments to be a form of non-disclosure agreement. We are allegedly protected from unauthorized discovery of our persons, property, and "effects", and our data would seem to fall under the .ing of "effects", not to be violated by governmental fiat
reply to post by nenothtu
 

As you said, the NDA is a close call, but given that he was disclosing how the government was ignoring the constitution, I'd give him a pass on that. The NDA's that I signed were in no way for anything that violated the constitution, and I would never disclose anything that I worked on.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


My wife clarified things for me, and I'm at peace about it. No NDA should be valid as a shield against illegal activity - the illegal nature of what it seeks to prevent divulgence of ought by rights and logic to invalidate it. How can a legal agreement logically protect illegal activity?

Snowden's NDAs were logically invalidated the instant that he witnessed illegal activity under their umbrella. The contract was broken at that point, and Snowden was no longer bound by it.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
I downloaded the Firefox Add-On dark-side-of-the-prism, which warns you when a site you are visiting is being monitored. Virtually all the other discussion sites are being monitored, but so far, ATS is not. What do you think this says? I'd be interested in your comments here. For those that wish to check this out, the url for the Add-on is:
addons.mozilla.org...


What makes you think ATS is not monitored? Because some add on says so?

Then how do you explain this little gem that happened here 3 years ago? www.abovetopsecret.com...

Sorry but this site is watched and monitored and HAS been.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   


What makes you think ATS is not monitored? Because some add on says so?
reply to post by MrWendal
 

Yes, I know. We established that early into this thread. I am not allowed to change the title or original OP though.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join