U.S to be hit by a massive cyber attack (DRILL)

[Level-Two]

SOURCE: politics.theatlantic.com/2010/02/_recreating_a_s_ituation.php

U.S. To Be Hit By Massive Cyber Attack On Feb. 16. Asterisk.[/b]
politics.theatlantic.com/2010/02/_recreating_a_s_ituation.php

On February 16, at about 10:00 am ET, the U.S. will be hit by a massive, crippling cyber attack from an unknown entity. Key players will convene in the White House situation room and plan the response, from mitigation to (possibly) retaliation. It'll be live on television -- G.N.N.

Of course, my knowledge of this attack will not add me to the radar screens of the FBI -- they know about it too. The reason I felt compelled to write a pseudo-serious lead to this post is because, for the first time, a cyber attack is going to be war-gamed, in public, for all the country to see. It will be quite realistic, featuring senior intelligence and national security officials, including former directors of intelligence agencies and combatant commands and homeland security advisers. A production company has been hired to re-create a White House Sit Room in the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, and professional scriptwriters have been working with experts to create a real-life scenario.

The sponsors of the event include companies with financial stakes in the future of cyber defense -- General Dynamics is one -- but also companies whose transactions are the lifeblood to the American economy, and who want to foster a greater sense of urgency among the public and policymakers. (PayPal has joined as a sponsor.)

Actual participants don't know what's going to happen. I have a general idea, but I have been sworn to keep the scenario a secret until it unfolds. It will be, I can say, dynamic -- runners with cards will enter the "Sit Room" with new information. It is not obvious. And it will not be easy to mitigate.

At the end, participants will step out of their roles for a hotwash --open to the press and the experts.

At least three times this year, the U.S. government has held private versions of cyber wargames. This will be open to the press. CNN has agreed to record the event for broadcast later in the week.

Participants include John Negroponte, the first DNI, who will be the fictional Secretary of State. (Intel insiders will enjoy this role change.) Ex-DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff will be the National Security Adviser. Fran Townsend, the former White House Homeland Security Adviser, will be the secretary of DHS. Former CIA deputy director John McLaughlin will be the Director of National Intelligence. Other big-name participants include Jamie Gorelick, Stewart Baker, Joe Lockhart and Bennet Johnson.

The Bipartisan Policy Center, which has ported over the 9/11 Commission co-chairs, Lee Hamilton and Tom Keane, is coordinating the event.

---

Why is this important? If anyone who knows anything about 9/11 (even if you don't buy the attacks being done/vacillated by the government) they ran drills of planes hitting the trade center before the planes hit (despite what George W. Bush and secretary, Condoleezza Rice said) when they claimed they never expected terrorist to crash planes into the towers.

Google searches you need to preform:
Google makes a push into super-fast broadband access internet

Watch this video:

Most claims made in this video can be backed up with google searches.

A LICENSE TO USE THE INTERNET?: au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/odd/6742229/un-chief-calls-for-treaty-to-prevent-cyber-war/

Why is this so important?

If they can get us onto a new internet grid (internet 2 or something of the like) they are going to TAX you for your internet use and find other obserd ways to further pillage your pockets at a time most of us are in debt.

Under this format; we lose our right to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. No doubt is the media 100% controlled with LEFT and RIGHT politics with no true medium in between. This system has proven to be flawed time and time again.

Why is this drill important?

It's conditioning. It's planting a seed into those who are unaware that this internet two isn't for saftey, but to further clamp down on the freedom of people as well as making profit. By showing viewers the horror of such a drill; they'll want the internet to be safer.

So what does this mean?

A cyber attack is probably coming, sometime soon. This will result in the introduction of a new and safer internet with improved security measures to keep internet users safe. This is what they'll pitch to the public for consumption.

I'll be posting something similar in a few communities pretaining to this game for discussion; but I figured I'd post this on APW first.

All I ask of the lot of you is to check this information out for yourself. The internet is probably one of the powerfull tool out there right now; when it comes to freedom of thinking and freedom of speech.

It's no surprise why the powers that be are now zoning in to control it.

Feel free to discuss.

[Dr. Matt]

...

What?

[Level-Two]

Feb 13, 2010 15:18:55 GMT -4 Dr. Matt said:

...

What?

To sum it up. They are airing drills of a cyber attack on national television. It's done for conditioning purposes only. A real cyber attack awaits us down the road; it will be done on purpose and meant to get us onto a NEW and SAFER version of the Internet (this is what THEY'll say)

While leaving out its capability of shutting you down as they feel fit. Limiting free speech and website usage as well as implementing taxes on internet usage. Use the internet too much--maybe more then let's say, four hours a day? Do you use up to much internet broadband to post videos, blogs, or websites? Well, you'll pay the government to do so.

You may also need a cyber license to use the internet. Terrorists aren't allowed on the internet.

I'm not being funny here, either. I have very basic sources listed in my original post. It's more damning with deeper research.

[Dr. Matt]

Exactly how is the US going to tax us Canadians?

And, you know, maybe this is good for society. We all spend too much time on the Internet anyways.

[Victor Hades]

Basically the same shit that went on in the movie, Life Free or Die Hard... (sort of).

Its a good message none the less to keep people advised.

In other words, we're technologically fucked, and no more porn for Gladiator.

[Level-Two]

Feb 17, 2010 22:44:07 GMT -4 Dr. Matt said:

Exactly how is the US going to tax us Canadians?

And, you know, maybe this is good for society. We all spend too much time on the Internet anyways.

U.S leads we follow.

This is being proposed in more then just the U.S; similar Internet censorship laws being proposed in various countries as well. I don't have them on the top of my head; but I'll throw out Ireland, England, and New Zealand for now as ISP's have already been banning websites that are critical of the U.S government and it's policies.

So, banning free speech is a good thing?

Sorry, I'll pass.

P.S; Hate speech is codeword for censorship. Under hate speech, they can classify, nearly everything under the sun as such.

You may not be critical with the government. Sadly, you may not even care. But I do. I don't buy into the shit they sell. Do I NOT have a right to my beliefs even if they don't effect YOU directly?

Take bodyscanner for example. They had a few in U.S courts and some in euro countries. One underwear bomber tries to blow up an airplane, and countries all over shout ''WE NEED BODYSCANNERS''

Coming to Canada. Yay.

If you think this applies to just the U.S your sadly mistaken. We are already under a global-like system of control and it's going to get worse.

Furthermore, under these censorship laws-- me telling YOU this right now, would be enough to shut off my internet access and fine me--because I'm not playing nice.

[Dr. Matt]

It's not that I don't care, it's just that I'm a skeptic. But, I'm not just a skeptic of the government. I'm skeptic of skeptic's too. Everybody will tell you anything to get you to follow them.

Now, I'm glad Hades brought up Die Hard, because all I can think about reading this is Justin Long going on about a firestorm.

And government censorship is a fact of life. But you know what, we'll move on. We'll find another way. People think the Internet is the be all and end all. If it's suppressed, something else will come along.

And as for full body scanners, all the fucking better. Air Travel is not a right, it's a privilege. I'll gladly let them look at my cock if it means that no one will blow the plane that I'm on up. If I hate the idea of airport security, I'll take a fucking car instead. It's just that simple.

[Level-Two]

And as for full body scanners, all the fucking better. Air Travel is not a right, it's a privilege. I'll gladly let them look at my cock if it means that no one will blow the plane that I'm on up. If I hate the idea of airport security, I'll take a fucking car instead. It's just that simple.

Until they start putting it in shopping malls and other public places....

P.S; You have a better chance dying on your way to the airport then being killed by a terrorist.

They're already working on technology, that can passively read through peoples clothing, and identify you as such from distances away. So, if I decided to walk down the street with a mask, it'll do no good.

All great stuff if it was set up to be used for tyrannical purposes. I really feel sorry for anyone who thinks the government is out for your saftey, I really do. It's all for system of control.

This isn't really skeptism. I heard CNN announce the airing the following program in the article, yesterday night.

Hell, Bill Gates likes Chineese styled net censorship. His words, not mine.

But you are right. You shouldn't believe everything you hear. Understand however, main-stream media is no more credible. The fact that they are owned by political parties, special intrests and the government is pretty much cements that they cannot be trusted.

Do your own research and come to a conclusion.

Internet no doubt is the last beacon of freedom of speech we really have. They take that away, and we currently do NOT have anything that is strong enough to get the message out.

I'll tell you this. The minute the internet goes down or a new system is implemented that restricts X amount of people-- it's about time shit will hit the fan.

[Victor Hades]

Feb 18, 2010 16:33:50 GMT -4 Dr. Matt said:

It's not that I don't care, it's just that I'm a skeptic. But, I'm not just a skeptic of the government. I'm skeptic of skeptic's too. Everybody will tell you anything to get you to follow them.

Now, I'm glad Hades brought up Die Hard, because all I can think about reading this is Justin Long going on about a firestorm.

And government censorship is a fact of life. But you know what, we'll move on. We'll find another way. People think the Internet is the be all and end all. If it's suppressed, something else will come along.

And as for full body scanners, all the fucking better. Air Travel is not a right, it's a privilege. I'll gladly let them look at my cock if it means that no one will blow the plane that I'm on up. If I hate the idea of airport security, I'll take a fucking car instead. It's just that simple.

amen

[Dr. Matt]

I need to break this up

Until they start putting it in shopping malls and other public places....

You're comparing apples and oranges. Until they start blowing up malls, that is. But, when I get in an airplane, I pretty much forfeit my ability to keep myself alive to the powers that be. You get on a plane, you're trusting the pilots and the security to keep you alive; because once something unfolds in the air, you are fucked. FUCKED. Anywhere else, I'd say maybe you've got a chance. But, point is, I want to know that everyone else on that plane is clean, and if I have to something humbling, so be it.

To say that it'll start leading to them putting them everyone in public? You sound like those church leaders that think that gay marriage leads to people marrying dogs or video game characters. Okay, so that second thing happened, but that's Japan and it doesn't count.

Back to the point, when it happens in places where it's not necessary, I'll complain. But, for now, in airports, it's fine.

P.S; You have a better chance dying on your way to the airport then being killed by a terrorist.

You can use statistics to prove anything remotely true. But you know what, I try to be a safe person and preserve my life. I don't smoke, I wear my seatbelt, I look both ways before I cross the street. Accidents happen. Disease happens. Those are things I can't prevent. But dying in a hijacked plane crash? Well, I feel like that can be prevented.

They're already working on technology, that can passively read through peoples clothing, and identify you as such from distances away. So, if I decided to walk down the street with a mask, it'll do no good.

All great stuff if it was set up to be used for tyrannical purposes. I really feel sorry for anyone who thinks the government is out for your saftey, I really do. It's all for system of control.

This is a fact of life. Government oppresses people. This has been happening since time began. The government cracks down, people find a way around it. This will always happen. Forever. If you think we can all stand up and fight tyranny, you are wrong. You can overthrow one government, but nothing will be any better.

Society is terrible. Period. This is an accepted fact that has been known for centuries. This is why I just don't care about this. Corruption will always exist. May as well just go with the flow.

This isn't really skeptism. I heard CNN announce the airing the following program in the article, yesterday night.

Hell, Bill Gates likes Chineese styled net censorship. His words, not mine.

But you are right. You shouldn't believe everything you hear. Understand however, main-stream media is no more credible. The fact that they are owned by political parties, special intrests and the govern*ment is pretty much cements that they cannot be trusted.

So you mean we shouldn't trust CNN?

Do your own research and come to a conclusion.

Internet no doubt is the last beacon of freedom of speech we really have. They take that away, and we currently do NOT have anything that is strong enough to get the message out.

I'll tell you this. The minute the internet goes down or a new system is implemented that restricts X amount of people-- it's about time shit will hit the fan.

Listen, everybody has their own bias. People do not want to show the other side of the argument. NOBODY DOES. Hell, I won't. You don't show your weakness trying to prove a point. There is no such thing as unbiased-ness. It's another fascinating facet of human behaviour.

But, another fascinating thing is that we can adapt. That is why we are the dominate species on Earth. If they want to restrict the internet, we will find another way. Hell, we were doing fine up until the '80s when the Internet started.

So, don't worry, as long as there are corrupt governments, people will always find a way to be subversive.

[Dr. Matt]

Oh, and did the cyber attack happen?

[Level-Two]

Feb 18, 2010 19:16:12 GMT -4 Dr. Matt said:

Oh, and did the cyber attack happen?

I'm stopping in real quick. I'll give your other stuff a response when I can sit down and do so.

The cyber attack is a test as stated in the article. Not a real cyberattack. And they are airing it on Saturday and Sunday, on CNN 8:00 PM EST if I am correct.

So, yes, they did the test.

[Dr. Matt]

Oh, right. My bad.

Point: Level-One.

[Level-Two]

Like I promised; I'd get back to the subject at hand.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Until they start blowing up malls, that is. But, when I get in an airplane, I pretty much forfeit my ability to keep myself alive to the powers that be. You get on a plane, you're trusting the pilots and the security to keep you alive; because once something unfolds in the air, you are fucked. FUCKED. Anywhere else, I'd say maybe you've got a chance. But, point is, I want to know that everyone else on that plane is clean, and if I have to something humbling, so be it.

Are you aware that there are already Body scanners in courts in the U.S? We, as a citzen MUST appear at court. That isn't much of a choice, like the airplanes is it? And when was the last time a court room was subject to a terrorist bomb attack? Hmm. At best, a lone nut, shoots a judge--but there isn't a pandemic of lone nuts shooting judges.

The introductions of the scanners much like anything, is a slow intergratable process. If we as citzens subject ourselves at aiports willingly, then we will at courts too. Then supermarkets, sports events, and anything else to do with public figures. With your mentality, you'd go along with it. We can't have a terrorist nut blow up a crowd, right?

Lastly, the body scanners have proven to not work. It cannot dectect bombs implanted in stomaches. It violates child porn laws. It wouldn't have dectected the underwear bombers substances, anyways. The FACT is the body scanners had been ordered BEFORE the incident. It's for submission. Put your hands up, get naked, and be a good little slave. These scanners aren't enough, as their is current discussion of adding X-RAYS scanners incase terrorist try to implant bombs in womens breast implants...imagine the cancer risk being subjected to that?

If you are that worried about a terrorist attack happening on your flight, you've fell for the big trick played on you. Again, that plane has a better chance of crashing, then it does being blown up. Why fly?

To say that it'll start leading to them putting them everyone in public? You sound like those church leaders that think that gay marriage leads to people marrying dogs or video game characters. Okay, so that second thing happened, but that's Japan and it doesn't count.

LOL. I explained this above. If there are REAL terrorist roaming around like the television tells you there is; if they can't blow up a plane, do you think they'll just give up? Or will they NOT find other means to do cause terror?

Back to the point, when it happens in places where it's not necessary, I'll complain. But, for now, in airports, it's fine.

It's not necessary in airports. We haven't had a major attack since 9/11. I'm not saying, there should be NO updates to the system; but not at the expense of peoples privacy. There is nothing about those scanners that tells me it improves the saftey of those on board anyway.

A) If a terrorist knows he can be dectected by the scanner he won't go through it.

B) If a terrorist knows he can get past the scanner by other means, he'll do it (like I said, the scanner cannot dectect implanted bombs)

C) It's just for us. Not for the terrorist.

You can use statistics to prove anything remotely true. But you know what, I try to be a safe person and preserve my life. I don't smoke, I wear my seatbelt, I look both ways before I cross the street. Accidents happen. Disease happens. Those are things I can't prevent. But dying in a hijacked plane crash? Well, I feel like that can be prevented.

I'm glad you take care of yourself, bro. Though, I don't see how giving up our privacy and other rights to be safe is worth it. Are we going to start banning cars, because to many people die in car crashes? Why don't we all just STAY HOME when it isn't required of us to work? Your safer that way, right?

Your right though. It can be prevented. How about let's start not letting underwear bombers without passports on board of planes? That's a great start.

This is a fact of life. Government oppresses people. This has been happening since time began. The government cracks down, people find a way around it. This will always happen. Forever. If you think we can all stand up and fight tyranny, you are wrong. You can overthrow one government, but nothing will be any better.

Sure, your right. The government does oppress it's people; but it's up to US to stay alert and stay active. Btack directly on topic, now. The invention of the internet has stalled the powers that be, agenda's very much so. Twenty years ago, you could get away with tryanny, because they controlled most mediums of info and it was harder to guage what your neighbor was thinking, per say.

They hate the internet because it's stronger then their number one propaganda machine, television. They hate the internet because the governments exposure of their frauds are exposed so wildly. They need to control it; and if they do, we're fucked. So, for now, I continue to cry wolf and do my part to spread the word the best I possibly can.

Society is terrible. Period. This is an accepted fact that has been known for centuries. This is why I just don't care about this. Corruption will always exist. May as well just go with the flow.[/img]

I urge you to read the following, Dr. Levine article on Physchology: bipolarblast.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/liberation-psychology/

From my own observation, you have a case of stockholm syndrome. I'm not even trying to be a dick; but your defeatist attitude is really dissapointing to hear. You've basically defended the government and shrugged off their crimes.

The truth is; the more people speak out; the establishments frauds fall apart. The Global warming fraud is in chaos right now; people are starting to realize the frauds of both political party system. Which is why, the REPUBLICANS have recently HI-JACKED TRUE tea-party movements, with their neo-con agenda, planting Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck as some up and coming liberty saviors.

I watch this shit go on EVERY fucking day, I know that the government cannot get away with the fraud if the people aren't with it. Sadly, there are also many who believe the lies.

It isn't the eye at the top of the pyramid who controls the direction of the country, it's the structure at the bottom, the largest part that holds that structure up.

That'd be us.

Shame you've been led to believe otherwise, bud.

So you mean we shouldn't trust CNN?

If your going to listen to any MSM; CNN is probably the most balanced one. But no, you cannot trust them. They lie like any other MSM program out there. However, if you are trying to associate it with the accuracy of the report their doing, I think you'd be wrong in doing so. CNN is brillaint with their propaganda peices and that's exactly what the entire thing, is.

Listen, everybody has their own bias. People do not want to show the other side of the argument. NOBODY DOES. Hell, I won't. You don't show your weakness trying to prove a point. There is no such thing as unbiased-ness. It's another fascinating facet of human behaviour.

But, another fascinating thing is that we can adapt. That is why we are the dominate species on Earth. If they want to restrict the internet, we will find another way. Hell, we were doing fine up until the '80s when the Internet started.

So, don't worry, as long as there are corrupt governments, people will always find a way to be subversive.

Matt, we all maybe baised; but to insinuate that nobody wants to hear the otherside of the story, is complete and utter bullshit. The only people who don't want to hear the other side of the story, are scam artists and criminals whom know their fraud is in danger and must control, control, control.

I don't think Jeff is going to delete my posts; if he came by and read them even if he didn't agree with them. The point I am making; is only the tryants and liars don't want to hear the other side. I'd love to hear both sides.

Anyways, I replied to some of this above. Nonetheless, your right there ARE ways to adapt, however; with defeatist attitudes AND without the internet, we are doomed. You must remember that while the internet wasn't here before the 80's; neither was the technology the government currently has. They fucking fly airplanes with remote controls.

[Dr. Matt]

I will admit that I'm paranoid about terrorists, but I'm equally as paranoid about plane crashes. I'm flying to New York next week and I'm losing sleep over it. But, that has nothing to do with the media. That's because I have fucking anxiety. And yes, I hate driving long distances, too. I'm really aware of my own mortality. But that has nothing to do with the government or the media. That has do with glorious chemical imbalances in my brain that cause my flight or fight reactions to go way too far into the "flight".

Anyways, let's just drop the airplane/body scanner thing because it's way the fuck off topic. I'll concede that I'm irrational, and that because of that, I'd give up privacy to in someway feel at
ease - but it's not the media; it's my overactive imagination.

As for my defeatist attitude, I wouldn't call it Stockholm Syndrome. I really couldn't give a fuck about the government. I know they don't give two shits about me as a person. My uncle is best friends with the Premier of New Brunswick, and that guy just really doesn't give a shit.

I don't vote, because in the end, nothing is going to change. I don't agree with any party fully and completely. It's not like it matters either, because no one keeps promises.

I could care more, but you know what, if people like you rose up, and took over the government and started running things, you'd become corrupt, and things would be just as bad as before. It's "Animal Farm", man. Power corrupts. And that's not a defense for the government. That's an indictment of society.

But as for the internet being the last bastion of human freedom? Come on, man. People spread information before the internet. And if we lose the internet, we will find another way. The internet isn't the be all and end all of human society. That's the point I'm trying to get at.

And for the record, my comment about CNN was pointing a flaw in your argument. You said you can't trust mainstream media two paragraphs after you tried to prove your point by talking about something you saw on CNN.

Anyways, we can keep this going if you want, but I'm not going to lie, I'm really apathetic. I'm going to live. I'm going to pay taxes. I'm going to die.

That's life. And it has a way of balancing itself out.

[Level-Two]

But as for the internet being the last bastion of human freedom? Come on, man. People spread information before the internet. And if we lose the internet, we will find another way. The internet isn't the be all and end all of human society. That's the point I'm trying to get at.

Again. I never said it's the end of human soceity. Are you saying there is JUST a more EFFECTIVE alternative to spreading information then the internet? I'd love to hear that one. Like I said, the internet is stalling some of the governments agenda. Instead of taking a logical approach and saying something like...

''The internet is a powerful tool for spreading the word and information and as much as I don't WANT to see it under the power that be's hands, it looks like it's going that way''

You basically say...

''SMH. Let them have the internet. What do I care? We can all just pass out fliers to spread the word...''

You don't make things harder on yourself. You don't wait until you lose ALL your rights to start fighting for them.

I don't vote, because in the end, nothing is going to change. I don't agree with any party fully and completely. It's not like it matters either, because no one keeps promises.

I agree. I know more about America's system then I do the canadian, though. There is a few good politicans; they just get drowned out by the establishment picked politicians. At least you can see past the left/right false-choice bullshit that fills this ''who can tell the best lie'' contest.

And for the record, my comment about CNN was pointing a flaw in your argument. You said you can't trust mainstream media two paragraphs after you tried to prove your point by talking about something you saw on CNN.

No flaw, bud. I fully explained this was a PROPAGANDA PEICE from a PROPAGANDA FORCE VIA the PROPAGANDA TUBE. The only lie CNN will be protraying, is when the insinuate we need more web-protection and big daddy government needs to handle it.

And what I saw on ''CNN'' was actually just an advertisement for said propaganda peice that was aired yesterday night, but I didn't watch it.

P.S; news is mostly based on a true story. It's the SPIN that makes it dangerous. If you turn on a left owned station; they go with the left side. Right owned station like FOX, they go with the right. But they'll ALWAYS deliver the SAME talking points with their own spin and all come together when they need to. It's quite, dirty.

Anyways, we can keep this going if you want, but I'm not going to lie, I'm really apathetic. I'm going to live. I'm going to pay taxes. I'm going to die.

As do I. But I feel anyone who has a kid and leaves them stranded on the upcoming, high-tech, slavery state. I feel it's important to stay informed and speak out when able too. Not roll over and give away our rights and freedomes, because it's easy to ignore it and turn on a sports game instead.

I'm a relatively normal guy, but I still try to get involved. Spread the word. I hope to do this through music. Even if shit hits the fan, well, at least I saw it coming.

Point is: The internet is a powerful tool. Why go above and beyond CHINA to censor it? You sound like you support it's censorship which is why I say, you have a defeatist attitude.

[Dr. Matt]

I'm just saying everything has shades of gray.

There is never a cut and dry answer to every problem, but it seems like everybody thinks there should be one. What do we censor? What can we really let people say? Yes, free speech is important, but then you get people who abuse it to abuse one another. But, do we consider that a crime?

I'm just saying there's a very deep, philosophical and moral question at the root of this problem. Unfortunately, our society thinks its best to have one solution and make it fit the majority while everyone else is screwed.

Yes, the internet is an important tool, but, like everything, it gets abused. It's really a Catch-22. You need to impose limits on some people's freedom to protect the freedom of others.

For example, if the internet was not controlled, a child pornographer could plaster pictures of nude children all over the internet. However, by doing that, he is taking away their privacy and dignity.

Now, I realize this is an extreme case, and maybe the media has me all brainwashed to think that this is a bigger problem than it is.

But, I dunno, I'm just trying to work hard to prove why I'm apathetic (now that's ironic).

I personally just don't believe anyone truly has it right. Governments want to censor what we do, if things that shouldn't be censored. You say we should have freedom, but do you not think we need to draw a line somewhere? And therein lies the problem. We'll never know where to truly draw the line.

And, tell me, who among us really can decide what should be allowed and what shouldn't be?

[Level-Two]

Feb 22, 2010 9:45:22 GMT -4 Dr. Matt said:

I'm just saying everything has shades of gray.

There is never a cut and dry answer to every problem, but it seems like everybody thinks there should be one. What do we censor? What can we really let people say? Yes, free speech is important, but then you get people who abuse it to abuse one another. But, do we consider that a crime?

I'm just saying there's a very deep, philosophical and moral question at the root of this problem. Unfortunately, our society thinks its best to have one solution and make it fit the majority while everyone else is screwed.

Yes, the internet is an important tool, but, like everything, it gets abused. It's really a Catch-22. You need to impose limits on some people's freedom to protect the freedom of others.

Wrong. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. The freedome to express yourself. If your a racist cunt; then your allowed to be a racist cunt. Violent threats is another thing, that doesn't apply to this category.

Besides the boundaries you are alluding too; aren't the boundaries they want to impose. They are basically doing it for people with views similar to mine. Cass Sunstein (Obama Czar) wants to put either a TAX or make it illegal to ''conspiracy theroize''; I shit you not. The example a a theroy he listed was those who believe SUNLIGHT is good for you and don't believe the Global warming fraud.

He also describes using CO-INTEL-PRO to break up such groups who are speaking of it by getting people within the movements to incite violence in order to demonize the following groups.

Of course; the fancy wording used from the professer makes this entire thing easier to swallow.

And as I said these ''skeptics'' as we love to say, are holding their agendas back so they are eager to shut them up.

For example, if the internet was not controlled, a child pornographer could plaster pictures of nude children all over the internet. However, by doing that, he is taking away their privacy and dignity.

Now, I realize this is an extreme case, and maybe the media has me all brainwashed to think that this is a bigger problem than it is.

But, I dunno, I'm just trying to work hard to prove why I'm apathetic (now that's ironic).

CPS (not all CPS workers are involved; don't get me wrong) runs fucking child kindnapping/rape rings. That's a bigger problem. Nonetheless; it has nothing to do with child porn as to why the internet needs to be controlled by an INCOMPENTENT government. And yes these people should be locked away, technology already allows them to do so.

I personally just don't believe anyone truly has it right. Governments want to censor what we do, if things that shouldn't be censored. You say we should have freedom, but do you not think we need to draw a line somewhere? And therein lies the problem. We'll never know where to truly draw the line.

And, tell me, who among us really can decide what should be allowed and what shouldn't be?

Our countries have something called a constitution. That seems like a GREAT place to draw the line.

You ask these questions while agreeing that the government is corrupted from the inside out? Even if you FEEL a line needs to be drawn somewhere, you want the government to draw it for you? They can't even manage the economy, are bought out by bankers, all bought and paid for and you actually believe they want the internet for doing good?

The same government filled with politicans in which it is more then acceptable to admit their all fucking liars and out for themselves? You think they actually CARE about people's feelings being hurt on the internet? Bullshit.

As for the CNN peice. PURE PROGANGADA; even WORSE then I expected and that is saying a lot. Basically, they say it's an unprecident attack thus calls for extreme messures such as

Federalizing the National Guard. Basically, to handle the people freaking out about their loss of electricity.

and having the President (Obama) basically weild all powers which supercede the constitution.

I think this would basically be the pre-text for Martial Law.

I think one of the sceneros was the cellphones shutting off first? Oooooh, no more blackburry. Scary. How about no fucking power for a month? It's amazing how pathetic we've become.

And strategically this program was called ''We were warned''

WWW.

Maybe just a coincidence. Nonetheless, it was a total mental conditioning program which only cemented my believe that a cyberattack awaits us sometime soon and it will be done by people WITHIN the system.

LMFAO @ them claiming it could be some lone hacker in a basement.

[Dr. Matt]

Alright, you know what, I can't keep this up anymore. We're obviously going to have to agree to disagree on this one. While I believe this has been somewhat constructive and respectful, but I can't deal with people as passionate as you are.

So, I'm walking away before I start attacking you instead of your arguments. I know what I believe, but debate is certainly not my strong suit; and I don't think either one of us is going to get our points across to one another.

You keep fighting the man, and I'll keep not caring.

[Level-Two]

Nothing personal, bro. It's all good.

[Level-Two]

Hey, bud. I don't mean to beat a dead horse, and I'm not looking to start another debate about this, but I thought I'd share this with ANYONE who may have been following this thread, including you.

To say that it'll start leading to them putting them everyone in public? You sound like those church leaders that think that gay marriage leads to people marrying dogs or video game characters. Okay, so that second thing happened, but that's Japan and it doesn't count.

Back to the point, when it happens in places where it's not necessary, I'll complain. But, for now, in airports, it's fine.

THIS IS FROM HOMELAND SECURITY

Nuff' said.