Re: SundogUK Hmmm... not sure where to begin with this...
@Plump 'n Bleaty
> the data gathering does not equal the actual analysis
so you're claiming that it's not going to be gathered but not analysed? Howzat work, plumps?
> Some people feel the need to rock the boat on moral grounds. Let's use them for examples
If there was a unified mission behind the Occupy surveillance, it appears the purpose was to pass information about activists' plans to the finance industry. In one memo from August 2011, the FBI discusses informing officials at the New York Stock Exchange about "the planned Anarchist protest titled 'occupy Wall Street', scheduled for September 17, 2011.[sic] Numerous incidents have occurred in the past which show attempts by Anarchist groups to disrupt, influence, and or shut down normal business operations of financial districts."
The documents reveal that the FBI met with officials from four banks and one credit union, and spoke over the phone with a representative from a fifth bank. The FBI also talked with officials from the Richmond Federal Reserve, a branch of the central bank that covers much of the American South.
Documents released show coordination between the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and corporate America. They include a report by the Domestic Security Alliance Council (DSAC), described by the federal government as “a strategic partnership between the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the private sector,” discussing the OWS protests at the West Coast ports to “raise awareness concerning this type of criminal activity.” The DSAC report shows the nature of secret collaboration between American intelligence agencies and their corporate clients - the document contains a “handling notice” that the information is “meant for use primarily within the corporate security community. Such messages shall not be released in either written or oral form to the media, the general public or other personnel…” (The DSAC document was also obtained by the Northern California ACLU which has sought local FBI surveillance files.)
So they're also suppressing knowledge of the use of monitoring (just right for plump & bleaty apologists!)
There's plenty more.
The sad thing is that I do actually have some understading and agreement with large scale monitoring because terrorism is a real issue and it's only likely to grow, however having cringing, bleating, obsequious sheep trying to defend what many find indefensible... well, it actually undermines the point they're trying to make. I believe we need to know and all agree, democratically, what is acceptable and for that we need to be informed.
Have a blindfold, plumps, as it makes you feel better. But not us.