I read your article and I researched it, I don't need more news footage. It's just Snowdens exaggeration. You can believe it if you want, but there's no confirming it and the NSA is openly saying he's exaggerating. So you consistently sourcing (*)(*)(*)(*) that is based off of what Snowden says means nothing to me. I've read up on the program and what it can do. Nothing even close to what you THINK it can do or what you want it to be able to do. This is a waste of my time, believe whatever the (*)(*)(*)(*) you want Jango. You're dumb enough to believe 9/11 was a consipracy. Why would I think you would understand something as technical?
Most people, including news organizations, don't buy the N.S.A.'s denials. So if you want to continue to believe an agency that routinely lies, be my guest. But that comes at no surprise. Since it is officialdom, it must be believed.
Thanks for putting words in my mouth, but then again what should I expect? You routinely believe CT non-sense. I don't buy anything, and I'm not "buying" this because the NSA said so. I know for a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing fact that they can't do what you think they can do, because this is my area of knowledge. You don't know even know the difference between being able to "monitor" and "saving" the information. Since you can't even get the most simple of details figured out then I don't have to worry about your opinion. It's worthless.
If you think you're just wasting your time, and my opinion is worthless, why do you keep replying? Furthermore, you keep writing that your job and so-called area of knowledge is relevant or similar to the N.S.A. Hmm. Anyway, how do you know your systems aren't dwarfed by the N.S.A.'s in capability and all that?
To make sure misinformation isn't presented without combat. I stated that your opinion is worthless so that you knew I wasn't here because I thought you were making points. I'm here so other people comprehend. Uh, I did? Where did I say that? I said my knowledge is in mass data storage, and (mostly) website hosting. Therefore I know what can be stored, and what can and can't be done. I never once said that my job was similar to the N.S.A. Just more of your issues with reading comprehension. I guess that's how you became a truther in the first place, huh? You can't pay enough attention to the details of what you're reading. You're under the impression that data can just be collected and held on too. That the N.S.A. can just stream in all the phone calls (which with VOIP makes it more complicated), text messages, emails, and video conferences in order to scan them and make sure nothing sketchy is going on. You're just wrong, it's impossible. It's too much data and too much of a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing pipe dream. Because I'm not a total and complete moron. Why do you think the military hires outside contractors? How do you think Snowden got to the information itself? He wasn't working for the military at that time, he was working for a contractor. That's because the government, despite your ridiculous incredulity, has nothing more available to them than the leading technology fields. There are WAY smarter people designing products for Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Lockheed, etc, than that work for the government. Their career depends on making the newest product in the shortest amount of time, that blows away the competition. The government has no chance at keeping up to the private sector. To imply that just goes to show that you have no idea how the government, and the world work. You just dream things up, or imagine that it is so, and actually believe you have a point. Your hatred for the government blinds you to the facts of the real world, and then you add on idiots like Snowden, just making (*)(*)(*)(*) up, and you guys drink it up like kool-aid.
Yes you really are. More lies out of you. No surprise, though, considering who wrote it. Who the (*)(*)(*)(*) does that? See, I always had you pegged as Mr. I Don't Care. But a stated mission of combating so-called misinformation? Now that's peculiar. Oh, so you want to combat misinformation and influence others. Gotcha.
Haha and that's what truthers do, cherry pick, quote mine and make (*)(*)(*)(*) up so it supports their theories. Thank You Jango, yet again you show that you fit the mold to a T. ETA: Notice how Jango does not research, doesn't provide any information, and goes straight to ad hom attacks. I love it. This is just...it's beautiful. You couldn't have personified "Trutherism" more than that one post. You even try to make me look like a shill haha. Yep, all people that combat woo in the name of accuracy are "mysterious". Oh man...get a grip.
The funny thing is, I've stated that my soul purpose being involved in 9/11 at all is to combat the woo. Hell, I've said that several times here since I started posting. It took you until now, in an off-topic thread, while avoiding a pile of relevant questions, to finally have that sink in? Did you miss it the previous times I said it? Does that mean I work for the government? You can think I work for the government, it doesn't bother me at all. You can even think that I am something as stupid as a shill, here to misinform the likes of you, Fraud, 9/11waij. If that's what it takes for you to explain away why the bull(*)(*)(*)(*) truth movement haven't done a damn thing in the last 12 years, you go right ahead. It's your world buddy, make it as entertaining as you'd like. I'll sit over and continue to laugh, teary-eyed, at just how stupid that sounds.
Awe, listen to plaque moan about ad homs. What, he can't take what he dishes out? Didn't think so. Atypical of a coward.
If you go through pantyhoses' posts, you'll see he's said many different things as to why he's on this forum.
That's one talent I've never learned: juggling. And now, after a serious arm injury, I'm afraid I never will. But it's funny that you mention socks. How many "personalities" do you control around here? WAIJ, Scott, 7Forever - they're controlled by someone.
I have no control over anyone but myself. I've have little doubt there's only one 'truther' with multiple "personalities" on this board.
Prove it. Go ahead, go dig through "pantyhoses'" (Seriously? That's the best you have?) posts and find out all the things I've said Jango. I'll be waiting here patiently. I don't really care about Ad Hom attacks because I am not the one that comes out looking pathetic. You are. You have blatantly avoided information, and shown nothing but ignorance and incredulity in this entire thread. You've even managed to mess up reading my posts. You've attempted to put words in my mouth, and then when all else failed you THEN went to the ad homs. I'm fine with all of that Jango. Enjoy basking in your fear.
All data is stored and cataloged even though it is or is not CURRENTLY being analyzed. That fact that it's monitored at all is just cause for concern, and it should be of major concern to every free citizen. - - - Updated - - - That's why it's simply stored for future reference.
The Bush/Cheney created charade commonly referred to as 911, and heavily defended by shills in forums like this, is unlikely to occur again in this form, as the criminals associated with that black operation, are no longer in power. An "incident" of that proportion WILL inevitably occur again though, due to the fact that the event was so largely successful in remaining fully exposed to every citizen. The elitists who orchestrated the false flag WILL strike again, though in another form. They've learned a lot from the successful manipulation of the block headed public.
No, it's not. You have no idea what you're talking about. This is purely circular as Jango started with this same ridiculous concept. They may have some data that has been flagged, stored, and acquired using legal methods. This means they have warrants to acquire the information. However, there is no business, government or anyone that has the capability to store the information on a scale that you people think is available. You're wrong. This might actually be the closest thing to the truth you have ever said in your life. I am positive that they do have data stored for future reference. I am positive that they are monitoring known terrorists and have some of their information saved. Anything above and beyond that is a pipe dream.
Well, too bad we can't get more Edward Snowdens to come forward and expose just what IS being stored/mined/intercepted for future scrutiny. We used to critique the old Soviet Union for doing this kind of thing, yelling "communism!!!...communism!!!". Now we embrace what we once ridiculed. They certainly "have the capability" to store everything and anything these days. One small slice of being exposed to any corporate IT structure can verify that much. It's beyond ignorant to suggest that it isn't done, or that it isn't possible. That's complete nonsense.
