Spyproof

Unless you live under a rock in the jungle you must have heard by now about the leak of classified documents from National Security Agency regarding a program called PRISM. The person behind this exposure, and ex C.I.A. employee and employee of various N.S.A. private contractors seems to have quite a bit to say regarding the matter. Since it's a topic that was buzzing all over the place, and covered by professional reporters I'll stay away from repeating details, and I'll stick to some questions that sprouted in my mind and that no one else seems to ask.
Obama, the "saviour" jumped out quickly trying to explain to the masses that regarding phone-calls, the program records only caller and receiver phone numbers and duration of the phone call. No content. The reason to do this,in the first place: the same old chewed leitmotif about terrorism. "To catch the bad guys". My question is; If you deny the capture of phone call content, how in the name of hell are you going to explain to us the method to label a person as being a threat? Cause he made a phone call? He has a phone number? Or terrorist only call at a certain hour? See my point? You'll get absolutely nothing just by creating a log of phone calls. And as such I call bullshit on Obama and his acolytes.
Second; if this program is so "innocent" why was it kept a secret and when that secret surfaces, the person responsible for that is labelled "traitor" and "a threat to democracy". As someone said, why say "if you don't have something to hide you shouldn't be bothered by the government looking at your stuff" when on the same principle, if government doesn't have anything to hide, classified documents should not exist.
Third; they've been saying that PRISM doesn't target U.S. citizens or U.S. territory. So I guess screw the rest. If I call someone in the U.S., I'm a target. If I use any of U.S. based companies services (Apple, Google, Microsoft) I'm a target because at the end of the day, it is inevitable that my e-mail, VoIP and so on would go through one of those companies' servers and infrastructure.
Reading into the matter and seeing different positions people take, it is mind boggling the stupidity, ignorance, the amount of shit they can eat, and at the same time posing superior attitudes like the common man is incapable to understand how wholesome and good the "services" they provide are. "We don't tell you about secret programs cause you are not wielding sufficient intellect to understand.

So that's my rant. And the truth is this or any amount of press coverage won't change things. So when governments are using this sort of tactics, I find refuge in the deepest, darkest and the safest corners of the internet, where powers like this have no influence. And if it comes to worst, I still have my rock in the jungle to live under.    


Photo: digitalart

Racism, xenophobia and free speech.

So I am asked when can a person be "labelled" as racist, xenophobic and so on, and when it is a matter of freedom of speech. The solution to this question resides mostly in the question itself. You have freedom of speech when you speak. Either from the perspective of a joke or even personal beliefs, speaking in a certain way about a race or nation will most of the time fall under free speech. The exception to this "rule" is the role the person exercising the right of free speech fulfils. To give an example, a joke a saw recently went like this:
"Q: What is the difference between Hitler and Usain Bolt?
 A: Usain Bolt can finish a race"
Funny or not, it is for you to decide. If I repeat that  joke, it is an issue of how my interlocutor takes it. But it is in a wide way, a free speech. Now,if that joke is repeated by a country's president,there is an issue. What gives me the right to hide behind "free speech" while a president cannot? The very function and responsibilities we undertook at some point in our life.
Take note, the content of free speech isn't meant to be liked by ALL the people. The term itself offers this premise. Any offence taken by someone exposed to the described pattern of free speech, is the responsibility of the offence-taker. Judging a person for conflicting your views and even worse,acting on that judgement,in the lack of absolute truth, shows nothing else but daunting immaturity.  
Free speech turns into racism and xenophobia swiftly when a person, no matter who they are, perform actions on these personal beliefs. When it is no longer a speech, but actions, physical under form of violence or written, passed as "laws", then it is clear how to label the person at hand.
Another important part of this is the minority. A lot of people live under the impression, and it is a false one at best, that a person or a group of people that are usually the target of racist and xenophobic content cannot be themselves racist or xenophobes. Slavery is as racist as a person being attacked because they're "white in the wrong neighbourhood". Antisemitism is as racial and national sickening as it is demolishing Palestinian houses to make room for Jewish residential buildings.
And that's that. Just a small glimpse of a very wide and content broad subject. At the end of the day, this post, along with many others, have no other purpose than to put in perspective how you can be a better person. What is a "better person"? Well,
that is a story for another time.