Standard Mischief

Hey, anyone remember when this was run up the flagpole?

I could never decide if the design on this logo was just because some government maggot overdosed on comic books and cheesy pulp fiction, or that it was a calculated move to tweak the conspiracy wackjob nutzies into gushing forth all sorts of nonsense, such that Joe Sixpack and Jane Whinebox would just tune them out.

Anyway, to me you’ve got the all-seeing-eye (also seen on the back of them Federal Reserve Notes) there gazing over the globe. Damn Masons, conspiring to rule the world! And what does that latin crap around the pyramid on the $1 bill translate to again? “Bringing Forth a New Weird Odor”, right? Damn, they hide their treachery in plain sight, don’t they!

All kidding aside, the new government agency with the Iran-Contra felon (technically reversed) in charge didn’t go over too well did it? So they abandoned the dream, right? Or did they just change the name, fund it from the black budget, and continue on as usual?

(Here I am, stealing comments from another blog again.)
persimmon, over at SayUncle:

Those arguing that this sort of surveillance is legal are operating on the assumption that they know what is being done and how it works. How do they know all this? Because they trust what the people doing the spying say they are doing. That?s foolish, especially since there has been no judicial oversight and the official story keeps sloughing off layers as we learn more about what is really going on. No one will actually know enough to judge whether this stuff is legal until there has been an investigation and we either have reason to believe the spies? version of the story or not.

So is that cherry coke and moon pie that you bought with your credit (no signature needed if it’s under $25) card going into the very same database that has your entire online search history and the records of everybody you called on the phone since 9/11? Who knows?

From Wikipedia:

Extensive criticism of the IAO in the traditional media and on the Internet has come from both the left and the right — from civil libertarians and libertarians — who believe that massive information aggregation and analysis technologies lead to a form of dataveillance that can threaten individual liberties. To some, these developments are seen as another step down the slippery slope to a totalitarian state. Others believe that development of these technologies is inevitable and that designing systems and policies to control their use is a more effective strategy than simple opposition that has resulted in research and development projects migrating into classified programs.

Remember, with those National Security Letters that have been reinstated with the reenactment of the Perpetual Patriot Act, when they get served, they have to give up whatever requested data is asked on their customers. Can they afford to litigate your privacy? Will they even care?

Thankfully there seems to be a way to appeal those National Security Letters. So is there any chance we’ll get some judicial oversight on whether or not that part of the Perpetual Patriot Act is even Constitution? And how ya feeling about the supremes nowadays anyway?

Well, I for one am hoping that friends of mine that I’ve never met, but I converse with on a private mailing list don’t decide to buy fertilizer on the same day I buy diesel fuel while a third stocks up on strike anywhere matches, when a fourth decides to buy an airbag (with igniter) from an auto recycling yard. ‘Cuz the last thing I need right now is a 3am ninja dynamic entry in the war against terror.

Check out stuff at the Total Information Awareness Gift Shop!