He was referring to the hundreds of millions of connections that the NSA was reported to be spying on every month. It was the first of a series of articles based on documents provided by Laura Poitras.

And as for the problem of Merkel vs the other 80.5 million of us: it was after the aforementioned ~500 billion connections a month and after we were told that "our" IXP (DE-CIX) was bugged by GCHQ, NSA and our very own BND. Merkel didn't mind, the responsible Minister didn't mind -- why would they, it wasn't news to them. But when it was made public that Merkel's private phone was being tapped as well, they had to show some indignation, because the election was closing in and they wouldn't want to look like the total lackeys they are.

That's the difference in reaction he was referring to. Our government doesn't mind us being the target of dragnet surveillance. In fact, they'd like to join the club and get access to all that information themselves. That's what the no-spy-agreement is all about.

Jesus Christ and the gun-bashing bandwagon is leaving the station. My ramblings lost in the ether regardless of facts or fucking figures (death stats by firearms or violence), become mute when you consider that more Germans die of complications from their annual Bratwurst intake than from violent crimes. MY POINT was to pooh-pooh quadrophonic who turned the thread in the direction it went with a simple comment.

Then comes the bandwagon, which I attempted to derail, and now everyone wants to jump in and whine about their take on issues surrounding firearms in the United States, like they are some fucking problem. The problems' with criminals being created by a broken criminal justice system, the fear mongering fomented by news organizations and the cunts proposing legislation whenever some imbecile snaps, and the lackeys that feed on their output like pablum.

All stats, all anger directed at senseless crimes committed by the uncommitted with guns (mass shootings), and all dumb assess who feed on news organization's and their editorializing on sensible laws for guns (that we don't already have) in order to justify more laws become IRRELEVANT when you consider, that by design disarming partially or completely the average citizen is the goal of any fascist.

Most of you who UP-voted ASMO's comment without this explained context or with it, are pretty much the lay-down-and-fuck-me types who, should some fascist regime pop-in and tell them what and how to do things now, would enthusiastically succumb, especially if the offer were candy-coated and the statistics looked good, and you could keep things like groceries and your fucking car.
(and yeah, I up'ed quad's comment...I love to jump head-first into threads hi-jacked by passionate fools)

Or, you simply live in another paradigm (being in a country who has not systematically programmed their inhabitants with violence, fear, and race-tensions) and have no reference for the consternation of a sane, reasonable person surrounded by minions of dutiful robots.

Fuck an official news story and take the bullshit you are watching at face-fucking value maybe??? Try and reason the shit out and you're simply a lackey, a putty-cog in a doomed machine.

Tomorrow marks the 50th anniversary of the assassination of a president that while horrifying, kept him and his brother from becoming some hardcore gangster-brothers running the place. Who's to say we wouldn't be equally as fucked now, without the CIA or Vietnam? My only regrets were that Warren and his lackeys (who mostly still had careers in politics after acting like mafia thugs during the investigation) are protected cunts, and that asshole LBJ's legacy may never be exposed. I blame dumb-ass sheeple, mostly of whom went on sleeping to create all of you here today
*promote

Hey @enoch,

> dude,
> i totally appreciate the time you took to respond.

Sure, not a problem. It's a complex issue, and requires the time to consider and understand the details.

> "for a free market to exist there also has to be absolute liberty.-
> adam smith we have neither.
> IF we did,i would not be against a free market system.
> at least not in totality."

Uh-oh, I hope this isn't a "lesser of two evils" argument.. That is, "since we cannot have a free market lets go for full-blown socialism because it is supposedly better than fascism." It's a false choice and not one I think any true humanitarian would be willing to entertain.

> "should EVERYTHING be subject to a free market? police?
> firefighters? roads?"

In short, yes. Aversion to socialism is based on reality, in contrast to what you're saying. Socialism is failure. Central planning inevitably fails. Central planners do not have the required knowledge to plan an economy. You need economic calculation and economic calculation is impossible to achieve in a socialist "economy."

> "to me health should be a basic part of civilized society,by your
> arguments you disagree. ok..we both have that right."

Are you trying to conflate "socialized healthcare" with health? Let's not confuse the facts with personal attacks. You seem to be saying, "if you are against socialism you are against health." That makes no sense. None.
I might as well say, "If you are against free markets you are against health."

> "my argument is that some things should be a basic for civilized
> society. in my opinion health care is one of them."

In no way did I ever say that I am against healthcare. So what are you talking about?

> "for a free market to exist there also has to be absolute liberty.-
> adam smith we have neither."

You cannot have a free market without liberty any more than you can have liberty without liberty. This is obvious, so?

> "IF we did,i would not be against a free market system.
> at least not in totality."

So, if we had a free market, you wouldn't be "against" a free market? Hmm.

> "the reason why i dont feel a free market is the way to go is
> mainly due to the fact that politics and corporations have merged
> into one giant behemoth (plutocracy)."

That's fine, but this is not a matter of "feeling" but a matter of economic reality and empirical evidence and deductive truth.

> "i never really understood americans aversion to "socialism""

Perhaps some economic education will clarify things. Understanding economic calculation, for example, might be a good place to start.

> "i deal with the very people that could NEVER afford you."

You're wrong. For one thing, while I do work at a significant fee for my primary clients, I do a significant amount of pro bono work, as a choice, and because I, like you, believe that health care is a human right. And that's a key point you need to understand. You seem to believe that, if the state doesn't take care of people, then no one will, and so we need to steal money from people in the form of taxes, under the auspices of "helping the poor," when in fact, the bureaucrats ensure that only a portion (if any) of those taxes actually arrive with their intended recipients while those who would willingly help those people themselves are deprived of the resources to do so, by depleting their income with said taxes. It's an unnecessary middleman, and faulty logic. The fact that people have, do, and will continue to care about people is the fundamental fact the needs to be understood. As a "man of faith," I would hope that you have enough faith in other people that they would care about and for others (even without being coerced by the government to do so, by force).

Furthermore, we have to apply the free market in toto, not half-assed. You can't have a Keynesian corporatists and an over-regulated system and expect that people will be be able to afford healthcare. The fact is that in a free market, the number of people who cannot afford my services would actually decrease considerably, because many more options would arise for those who still couldn't afford me would but need my services.

> "in a free market there will be losers.the one who always lose.
> the poor,the homeless,the mentally ill."

The free market has ways of dealing with all of these. And yes some win, some lose. But in a socialist system, everyone loses (except for maybe the rulers and their lackeys). This seems, again, to be coming from a place of fear, a sense of helplessness without the government. But alas, nothing contributes to poverty, homelessness, and mental illness more than government does. Fact.

> "the free market is still profit driven and the poor will have it no
> better,possibly worse in such a system."

So, what is your proof that the poor will have it worse? How do you know? Or is this what you "feel" would be the case?

> "the reason why i suggested medicare is because it is already in
> place."

So was slavery when the South decided they wanted to keep it.

> "two things would happen if this country went the medicare route:
> 1.health insurance industry would obsolete.
> 2.the pharmaceutical industry would find itself having to negotiate
> drug prices"

1. Yes, the government would have a monopoly on health coverage, and by extension all of healthcare. Economic calculation at this point becomes utterly impossible. Chaos follows. And healthcare quality and service plummets. I have research studies to support this if you're interested.

2. Why not nationalize pharmaceuticals while you are at it?

> "i may be a man of faith but i am a humanist at heart.for-profit
> health care will still have similar results as our current because
> the poor and working poor population is growing."

Without appealing to moral superiority, allow me to assure you that there is nothing -- not one thing -- that is moral or ethical about allowing the government coerce, aggress, commit violence, and violate individual's inalienable rights to self-ownership and property rights, as you proposing with such socialist "solutions." In my humble opinion, a true man of faith would not stand for such things, but would stand against them.

> "the poor and working poor population is growing."

Indeed we do, and we all have inflation, cronyism, Lord Keynes' bogus economic "system" and government's meddling to thank for this.

> "i am all for an actual free market but some things should be done
> collectively."

By "collectively," I assume you mean "by central authorities," yes? Because the free market is, in fact, collective. But there is nothing "collective" about central planning. Except for the fact that the "collective" is mandated to obey the dictates of the central planners.

> "its not only the right thing to so but the human thing to do."

1. Whatever your "feelings" are about it, there is an economic reality to deal with. Such a sentiment misses the point, and will result in hurting more people than it helps.

2. There is nothing "human" (or humane) in aggression, coercion, and violations of sovereignty, all of which underpins an implementation of a socialized system.

"The right thing to do" is to respect self-ownership and property rights. Doing anything else will eventually backfire. "People are not chessmen you move on a board at your whim."

Any one who is serious about contributing to solving and/or ameliorating the issues of poverty, homelessness, and/or mental illness and many of the other symptoms of our social detritus, needs to develop real, sustainable free market solutions to these. Otherwise, their efforts will be in vain (even if -- or perhaps especially if -- they are adopted by government for implementation). Anything else will not improve any of these but will only serve to make matters worse.

Going back to the basics, free market competition will always provide better goods/services at lower prices than the monopolies (fostered and engendered by the lack of economic calculations due to governmental intervention and regulations). Healthcare is no exception to this. Why would it be? Furthermore, why believe that the central planners/kleptocrats aren't profit-driven? Why believe that a "government" monopoly doesn't suffer from a lack of economic calculation? And what's wrong with being profit-driven, however you may individually define "profit?" Do you/I/we not act for what you/I/we consider the best? (Having faith is not a part-time job.)

Do you not act to achieve desired goals?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you haven't fully thought things through. But as I'm sure you know, "It is easy to be conspicuously 'compassionate' if others are being forced to pay the cost."

> "thats my 2 cents anyways.i could probably ramble on for a few
> hours but i dont want to bore you. always a pleasure my friend.
> namaste"

It's not boring, but does take a bit of time to consider and understand all of the details. It's complex, and certainly a challenge to navigate your way through the morass of rhetoric, conditioning, and cultural misdirection that is pervasive in our society, especially when considering what passes for "news" and "facts." This is particularly true with regards to the economy, which is heavily politicized, despite being a rational science that can be understood if one takes the time to learn about its mechanism.

Since you signed off with "namaste," perhaps it would be worth reminding you that the first principle of yoga is "ahimsa para dharma" : non-violence is the highest duty.

Perhaps videosift isn't the best medium in which to educate people on non-violence and economics, but alas, it can be entertaining and, possibly have have some positive effect at some point.

Hope this helps.

Snowden handed another set of slides over to the largest newspaper in Germany as well as a public broadcasting service. These slides include the names of telecoms that were involved in GCHQ's dragnet program.

The crème de la crème:
Verizon Business, Codename: Dacron, British Telecommunications ("Remedy"), Vodafone Cable ("Gerontic"), Global Crossing ("Pinnage"), Level 3 ("Little"), Viatel ("Vitreous"), Interoute ("Streetcar").

Many of these are customers of DE-CIX, the world's largest IXP, whose operators were adamant in their claim that no foreign service has access to their infrastructure -- no word about their corporate lackeys, understandably so.

And you gotta love how brazen they are in their admission that GCHQ's work is in the best interest of Britain's economy -- yes, economy.

And while we're at it: public broadcast journalists dug out a list of 207 US companies that are involved in intelligence gathering on German soil. Best comment was by the CEO of DE-CIX: these providers (re: Level 3) work in accordance with US law, even in Frankfurt. Not German law, US law.

Maybe we can still beat Puerto Rico in the race to become your 51st state.

Man-What a bung-wipe of a paper that schools got-HB has enough material with that piece...oh man, he should've written scathing letters to that school after his gig there calling them to task on the mention of his salary-That's pretty messed-up. Another seething news-lackey in the incubator.

The Tesla and cars like it would be everywhere now for pennies, and the roadways would be coated with photovoltaic compounds which provided energy to the entire grid as well as the cars driving on it were it not for the cunts running the show.

The technology has been here over 40 years, but corporate cunts and their lackeys in congress' worldwide, keep it from implementation. We all know why, thieves and assholes run the planet.

A series of a combination of natural disasters, civil disobedience and perpetual guerrilla sorties on corporate entities are the only things to stop the madness at this stage in our decline.

Dream on if you think the world of free-energy and everyone driving affordable electric vehicles is in our near future-Unless you chop off the head, the beast will only grow stronger.

-Always trips me out that there hasn't ever been more users using both up-and-down votes with equal frequency, especially with spam-like political-pundit offerings or a "year of 10 Rachael Maddow segments on every page."
-Who the fuck needs cable TV when there's devoted lackeys dutifully uploading every fucking newscast onto you tube?? YOU TUBE, where it belongs!! Why the fuck should we suffer infotainmentindoctrination here, I often ask myself....Then downvote , the same sensibilities guiding my hand.

Breitbart died of natural causes, probably due a mix of poor diet, lack of exercise and high levels of stress. I'm surprised you would buy into his nonsense, considering the amount of time you spend railing on dishonest and frivolous media. Breitbart was as dishonest and frivolous as they come.

Ham is correct, that Brietbart lackey got his ass handed to him on a silver platter.

Sounds harmless enough and he used some language that reflects my sentiments regarding society and how broken it is and efforts to adjust cultural mores.

That said I am confident that some comments on this subject here will continue to wax manically and emotionally bereft of critical common sense, and the most eloquent verbiage used to argue will still sound like automotomacious lackeys groomed for predictable, subservient responses to government mandates which subjugate responsible and humanitarian free-will.

These dysfunctional responses to society's cultural and spiritual demise from a broken governmental machine which neither represents my own sensibilities or is capable of making laws which do nothing more than to systematically turn us all into obedient husks??!.... I don't care what becomes of the laws concerning guns anymore in the U.S. As a citizen I will continue to own whatever firearm I chose to regardless of what list it's on and if I ever need the tools they will be there.

Laws providing ways for responsible people to have guns, not prohibitions. SANE
Prohibit imbeciles and the un-hinged from being a threat by limiting their access,.
SANE
More laws designed to make ME a fucking criminal. Fucking insane.

Prison State Evolution, read some fucking history for christfucking sakes!

>> ^enoch:

you guys ever meet a slave so thoroughly convinced he was not a slave?
i present to you the comment above for your consideration.


Sorry man, but I feel a bit of investigative (British pronunciation) delving would find the long-winded My_design either a corporate shill or (insert other perceived derogatory corporate lackey chore) kin to the, oh-so-equitable and humanitarian Walton family of human garbage.

All systems are in decay upon conception and the rate of decay accelerates upon implementation there, Trancecoach...

Walmart is to unions as grouper is to red tide. Their current "fuck our employees as we fuck the planet" model would flash incinerate the moment their employees had a say in a future with Walmart other than the one they have: "Stay poor, stay ill, do your job, insect, then die."

I'd love to see Walmart burn this year. ALL power to their employees, sweatshop-showcase lackeys all!!


You know ho to save money at Walmart? Buy only goods from their shelves that are manufactured in the United States. You won't need a shopping cart.

Here's the real deal: In America, you are rich according to most of the know world's standards by way of your geographical location. If you live here and think yourself poor you have been duped by those who have designed the place to operate on a mixture of your blood and psyche.

True wealth comes from the freedom from desire and the leisure to evolve spiritually, physically, emotionally, etc. The box most are kept in by the few who determine the direction of humankind according to their power and influence over economies and governments??...Pure, fucking, evil. Always been here, always will be.
Obama is one of their lackey's (for all ye who would "vote" a better way), and the other candidate is an equally as out-of-touch, succubus from the realm of the undead.

*promote banishment of legislators, lobbyists, or lackeys of dealers who support criminalization of medicinal marijuana, hemp, or any variety of cannabis sativa or cannabis Indica