back to article Latest Snowden leak claims NSA bugged ALL mobile calls in the Bahamas

A fresh dossier of documents apparently from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden claims that the NSA is running a telephone-tapping system that records the metadata and content of all mobile phone calls of two countries, including the island paradise of the Bahamas. The documents, published in The Intercept, state that the system …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Will Godfrey Silver badge
    Big Brother

    The gift that keeps on giving

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Will Godfrey

      "The gift that keeps on giving". Yeah, and - yet again - right after the Chinese have been accused of cyber spying! What a co incidence.....

      1. dan1980

        Re: Will Godfrey

        @Matt

        Is it not equally possible that the US's increased noise about Chinese spying/'hacking' is a reaction to the bad publicity they are getting - a 'look over there' tactic?

        Is it not equally possible that the US, with their vast spying and data collection efforts, found out that there was going to be a new release of information and pre-empted it with their naming of the 5 Chinese 'hackers'?

        Or, seeing as it has been established many, many times that Snowden passed all his information over to the press and they choose what to release and when, is it nor equally possible that, though the timing was deliberate, it was done for effect by the press and not by the Chinese government? (Which seems to be what you are implying.)

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: dan1980 Re: Will Godfrey

          "Is it not equally possible that the US's increased noise about Chinese spying/'hacking' is a reaction to the bad publicity they are getting - a 'look over there' tactic?...." No, because the US was complaining about Chinese state-sponsored hacking long before Snowjob even started contracting for the NSA.

          "....Is it not equally possible that the US, with their vast spying and data collection efforts, found out that there was going to be a new release of information and pre-empted it with their naming of the 5 Chinese 'hackers'?....." So you want to fall back on the standard sheeple paranoid delusion about the All Seeing All Omnipotent Big Brother? Puh-lease, if that was the case then Snowjob would never have even got hired and the Chinese would have been facing the naming of their hackers years ago.

          "....Snowden passed all his information over to the press...." Apart from the fact Snowjob handed (or more likely sold) his data to Greenwald and Poitras, he has made intimations in interviews that there is 'other stuff' he did not pass on. Hence his need to hide behind Putin's skirts.

          ".....and they choose what to release......" Having seen the type of loon that Poitras and Greenwald associate with, I would not be surprised if the Chinese government is being kept well-informed of their plans, even if we want to be generous and say not intentionally by Greenwald and Poitras. Personally, I would say that I think Greenwald and Poitras have a monetary interest in keeping the focus on the NSA, and it's not like China and the old Soviet Russia didn't regularly pay such 'dissident voices' to shout when required. Greenwald's income depends on maintaining the myth that the NSA is a unique and pernicious threat to all mankind, something he cannot do unless he also tries to smother other information sources exposing the good work the NSA does. So, no, I don't think it a con-incidence at all.

          1. BlueGreen

            Re: dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

            Hi plumps,

            > tries to smother other information sources exposing the good work the NSA does

            Sounds interesting. What good work is this?

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: Boring green Re: dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

              "......What good work is this?" Go read the article and the links included, it states the authorities were very pleased with the intelligence they received which helped them investigating such gangs. Oh, sorry, you never read the article, you just rush to bleat what you have been told to bleat.

              1. BlueGreen

                Re: Boring green dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

                Sorry plumps, I must have missed it. All I can see is <https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1164088-somalget.html> which is a 2 page puff-piece that brags about technical capabilities and makes claims without verification. Could you repost please?

                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                  Facepalm

                  Re: Boring green dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

                  ".....makes claims without verification. Could you repost please?" I forgot your lot don't view drug smugglers and the like as criminals, just as suppliers.

                  1. BlueGreen

                    Re: Boring green dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

                    > I forgot your lot don't view drug smugglers and the like as criminals, just as suppliers.

                    With verifiable claims, please plumpo. Verifiable, not 'cos we say so'. And when you've done that we can discuss proprortionality ie. are their efforts producing an ROI that is justifiable against the cost.

                    Those links please, lambchop.

                    1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  2. Christoph Silver badge

    it follows procedures to "protect the privacy of U.S. persons"

    The US has constitutional rights to protect 'real' people - US citizens. Everybody else is considered sub-human and doesn't have those rights.

    Europe has human rights legislation. Everyone has rights, whoever and wherever they are.

    Until the ConDems take us out of that system of course. Complaining that the Human Rights legislation stops them doing whatever they want, which is the whole bloody point!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Trollface

      @Christoph - "The US has constitutional rights to protect 'real' people - US citizens. Everybody else is considered sub-human and doesn't have those rights."

      And your point is??

    2. Captain Hogwash
      FAIL

      Re: "Until the ConDems take us out of that system"

      The Cons are split between the leadership who want to stay in, subject to some reforms they want to push for, and some on the back benches who want to take us out. The Dems want to stay in.

    3. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: Christoph

      ".....Complaining that the Human Rights legislation stops them doing whatever they want, which is the whole bloody point!" Yeah, Abu Hamza would so agree with you. And so would his lawyers, the people who are really raking it in with the eight-year legal delays caused by such 'rights'.

      1. John Hughes

        Abu Hamza

        It's always easy to claim that "bad people" shouldn't be protected by the law.

        Just hope they never decide you're a bad person.

      2. Graham Marsden
        Boffin

        @Matt Bryant - Re: Christoph

        Here's a quote from "A Man for All Seasons" that you might like to think about...

        * * * * *

        Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

        More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

        Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

        More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down (and you're just the man to do it!), do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

        * * * * *

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          WTF?

          Re: Marsbarbrain Re: @Matt Bryant - Christoph

          ".....now you give the Devil the benefit of law!...." Nothing illustrates the extent of poor Graham's paranoid delusions than his insistence that the NSA is The Devil. For sheeple like him it really is a religion, based on faith and unquestioning belief in The Cause. So sad.

          1. Graham Marsden
            FAIL

            Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

            Oh look, once again Matt Bryant goes for the ad hominem, attacking the poster rather than addressing the argument.

            Yawn.

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

              ".... attacking the poster rather than addressing the argument." You didn't post any form of argument whatsoever, get over yourself.

          2. BlueGreen

            Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

            Hi plumps,

            Graham's point was allegorical. He's not actually saying the NSA is the devil.

            BTW mangling names into slightly derogatory forms like Marsbarbrain - how do you think it makes you look to other people? Wildean-clever or a peurile dick?

            ("Plump'n'Bleaty" - good name for a barbecue-themed restaurant chain, dontcha reckon, lambchop?)

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: Boring Green Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

              And another fact-free and argument-free post from Boring Green. Not really a surprise. We really need a yawn icon for his bleating.

              1. BlueGreen

                Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

                Graham's point was allegorical. This is A Fact.

                Also there was a question there that you missed, something about your practice of name munging. Please answer it.

                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                  FAIL

                  Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

                  "Graham's point was allegorical......" Marsbarbrain's non-point was a vacuous attempt to sound smart whilst implying the NSA are 'evil'. Still, whilst it might only hit a one-out-of-a-hundred on the relevance scale, compared to your contributions it was a pearl of wisdom.

                  Go waste electricity elsewhere, you have again failed to add anything to the discussion other than your transparent attempts to suppress a viewpoint that does not match the one you have been spoonfed. We all know dissent in the flock is verboten, but please realise we're not all sheeple like you.

                  1. BlueGreen

                    Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

                    > compared to your contributions it was a pearl of wisdom.

                    well, giving us credit due, that's something!

                    > your transparent attempts to suppress a viewpoint that does not match the one you have been spoonfed

                    My posts here didn't try to supress anything, or address anything but your behaviour and responses.

                    Okay. Now, on that front: That question you seem to be avoiding about name stuff. Could you answer it please.

                    1. BlueGreen

                      Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

                      Could you answer that question please, lambchop.

                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                        FAIL

                        Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

                        "Could you answer that question....." Post a question or argument related to the thread rather than another desperate attempt at diversion and suppression of dissenting thought and I will.

                        1. BlueGreen

                          Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

                          Hi Matt, I think I already laid out my position above, to recap, then, that claims be verifiable, which tends to imply that the NSA's work be accountable to somebody, not necessarily public, but some trustworthy independent other party. Then, rather importantly we can judge whether all this spying is producing a proportionately useful result, or is effectively a waste of money.

                          Once someone's credibility is blown, it's very hard to regain, and the NSA do not appear to have been very truthful. I don't find them trustworthy as they've already lied:

                          "

                          Pressed by the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at an oversight hearing, Gen. Keith B. Alexander admitted that the number of terrorist plots foiled by the NSA’s huge database of every phone call made in or to America was only one or perhaps two — far smaller than the 54 originally claimed by the administration.

                          "

                          <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/2/nsa-chief-figures-foiled-terror-plots-misleading/>

                          more here: <http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/15756-doubt-surrounds-claims-of-nsa-success-in-foiling-terrorist-attacks>

                          Another interesting question would be the overall effect on the image of the United States, and whether it was doing more damage overall in the long-term than any short-term gain.

                          To be honest, Matt, we've gone over this a hundred times so I don't know why you keep asking for more.

                          Now, as you said you would, please answer the question of that name munging, thank you.

                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                            FAIL

                            Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

                            ".....Then, rather importantly we can judge whether all this spying is producing a proportionately useful result, or is effectively a waste of money...." But you and the rest of the sheeple already made it very clear that you have no interest in weighing up the results. You are far too happy living your paranoid delusions about being individually spied on.

                            "....Once someone's credibility is blown, it's very hard to regain, and the NSA do not appear to have been very truthful....." So first you say the NSA is an Uber Big Brother organisation with superhuman eavesdropping capabilities, but then you try and say that they are totally ineffective. You can't have it both ways, either they are harmless and you can quit whining about it, or they really are über and therefore excellent value for money in securing us against criminals and terrorists.

                            ".....To be honest, Matt, we've gone over this a hundred times so I don't know why you keep asking for more....." You mean you have made boring and repetitive evasions a hundred times when you can't answer the simplest of questions. Here's a simple one you always run away from - show how this exercise harmed any actual innocents. Don't get in too much of a fluster trying to think of an evasion, I honestly don't expect you to even try a straight answer.

                            /seriously need a 'Yawn' icon for use with this member of the flock.

                            1. BlueGreen

                              Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

                              You asked for a thread-related comment, I gave one in good faith. You may disagree with my views but that's not the point. I knew you were going to duck the question I specifically asked by addressing the comments you asked for. Well, on this we're just going to have to disagree for the moment. Me -> NSA bad, you -> NSA good. Ok. Whatever.

                              My views on the NSA were not relevant because the question wasn't about the NSA/spying/etc. but about your ... shall we say, 'modification' ... of other poster's names, and how you think it makes you look to others.

                              That was the question. I've asked 3 or 4 times, you explicitly said you would answer it, now please honour your side of the agreement, Matt.

                              1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                FAIL

                                Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

                                "You asked for a thread-related comment, I gave one in good faith......" Yawn. Apart from the fact there is no good faith in your attempts to obscure and divert from the actual topic of the article, you did not post any such comment other than whining about names. That has nothing to do with the thread and all to do with your bruised ego. And I note - as expected - you again ran and hid from the challenge of providing any evidence of any innocent being harmed in any way by this NSA action.

                                ".....My views on the NSA were not relevant....." You stated you and the rest of the sheeple needed to know the extent of the NSA's activities in this operation and the intelligence so you could form an opinion on the merits of the operation, whereas the truth is you have already been spoonfed an opinion and actually only want the information in a mindless desire to limit the activities of the NSA, regardless of the actual value they provide. Your actual statement in this thread was: '.....I think I already laid out my position above, to recap, then, that claims be verifiable, which tends to imply that the NSA's work be accountable to somebody, not necessarily public, but some trustworthy independent other party. Then, rather importantly we can judge whether all this spying is producing a proportionately useful result, or is effectively a waste of money.....' But you clearly already have a strongly-held position which denies any other viewpoint, so your demand for more information to form an opinion is simply a lie. So, yes, exposing your hypocritical statements and views is relevant to the topic, much more so than your bruised ego and evasions.

                                ".....That was the question. I've asked 3 or 4 times...." That was the irrelevance you attempted to use as diversion and evasion of the real subject matter. After all, in numerous threads, I have asked many more than three or four times for you to provide proof of harm to innocents, of the supposed blackmail and intrusion you lot in the flock insist must have been going on for years, and yet you always avoid answering. Surely, if the Big Bad NSA is so evil and intent on controlling us all there should be some proof of such oppressive activity? But there's none, and you hide from any discussion of that lack of proof because it neatly implodes your paranoid-driven fantasies. Face it, all you do is bleat male bovine manure because you are too uncomfortable with actually answering real questions that challenge the 'views' you have been spoonfed.

                                1. BlueGreen

                                  Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

                                  Nice duck & dive matt.

                                  Here's what you said "Post a question or argument related to the thread rather than another desperate attempt at diversion and suppression of dissenting thought and I will."

                                  And I did. You said you'd answer the question if I contributed to the thread, I did, as best I could. You may not like what I said but I tried. Let's agree to differ for the moment.

                                  Now about your name mangling, please answer that one AS YOU SAID YOU WOULD. Thanks.

                                  1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                    FAIL

                                    Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

                                    "....And I did...." No you didn't. And you're still avoiding the question about providing proof of any harm to innocents. Double yawn.

                                    1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

                                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                        FAIL

                                        Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump & Bleaty

                                        "....my question was possible abuse of power, and proportionality...." But that is the crux of your denial - you have no evidence of harm and therefore no evidence of abuse of power, and your hysterical, paranoid-delusional state means you have SFA chance of judging proportionality, even though you must know you have no evidence of harm since you are so desperate to avoid the question. And the reason you don't want to acknowledge the lack of harm is because to do so massively undermines your whole, bleated non-argument. You need to insist on the inevitability of abuse of power because you want to baaaah-lieve it must happen, otherwise you would have to acknowledge your whole worldview is based on groundless paranoia. Once again, your failure is simply yawn-inducing.

                                        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                          Happy

                                          Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump & Bleaty

                                          "....my question was possible abuse of power, and proportionality...." Since Boring Green is so keen to deny the effectiveness of the NSA and other authorities actively looking for crims on the Internet, I'm betting he really won't want anyone to read this article about Sabu's trial (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27579765). The really interesting bit is the Lultwatz seem to have formed in May 2011 and only a month later the FBI arrested Sabu, supposedly a 'leeet haxor', which points to a pretty slick investigation. It also mentions how turning Sabu saved millions in defeating or preventing 300-odd cyber attacks from him and his Anonyputz chums. Chalk another one up for The Man and have a good laugh at Boring's inevitable attempts at denial!

                                          1. BlueGreen

                                            Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump & Bleaty

                                            > and only a month later the FBI arrested Sabu, supposedly a 'leeet haxor', which points to a pretty slick investigation

                                            Hmm? "leet haxor'? But Plump & Bleaty says here <http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2076519>

                                            "Yeah, it's kinda hard to understand some of the silly things Sabu and his dummy chummies got up to, but have an account with "mujahideen" in the name when you're trying to avoid the attention of the NSA and FBI!?!?!? Duh!"

                                            So leet, or a dummy? Which version of reality does lambchop prefer today?

                                            But that's not all! Plumpo also says in <http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2170974>

                                            "Sabu and his chums were already career criminals"

                                            So already a career criminal (your words) that took the entire might of NSA spying to get him. But if he was already a career criminal, The Man must have been doing a great job, eh?

                                            > It also mentions how turning Sabu saved millions in defeating or preventing 300-odd cyber attacks from him and his Anonyputz chums

                                            Well, so it's claimed. But let's accept for the moment those 300 hacks prevented and millions of dollars saved! Hooray for The Man. Oh, wait,

                                            "NSA Spying Scandal Could Cost U.S. Cloud Computing Firms $35 Billion" - from <http://www.dailyfinance.com/on/nsa-spying-scandal-cloud-computing-lost-business/>.

                                            Hooray for Plumpness!

                                            "Insight: How U.S. spying cost Boeing multibillion-dollar jet contract" - from <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/20/us-boeing-brazil-insight-idUSBRE9BJ10P20131220>

                                            Hooray for His Bleatings!

                                            Save millions at the cost of billions! Hooray for the soft scuttly one! Hooray for Farmer! Hooray for human stupidity (ours, lambchop, never yours)!

                                            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                              FAIL

                                              Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump & Bleaty

                                              ".....So leet, or a dummy? Which version of reality does lambchop prefer today?...." I made it very obvious what I thought of Sabu's 'skills' with the 'supposedly' bit. Try a bit of reading and comprehension before your next bout of rabid tryping, moron. It is you and the other Faithful that bleated on and on about how the Lulztwatz were 'so cool' and 'uncatchable'.

                                              ".....Save millions at the cost of billions!....." With just one case, and there are plenty more out there. Who knows how many millions in profits to US businesses and those of other Western allies by defeating Chinese hacking, let alone the dumbarsed Anonyputzs and their Low IQ Cannon and other DDoS attacks. Then there's the costs of terror attacks diverted, let alone the unquanitifiable saving of human lives. Or the costs in human lives and prevented crimes in tracking drug and people smugglers in the Bahamas. Oh, sorry, I forgot, you don't have the ability to think that through.

                                              1. BlueGreen

                                                Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump & Bleaty

                                                Ewe boring me, plumpo.

                                                TTFN

                                                ~ World 8, lambchop nil ~

                                                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                  Happy

                                                  Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump & Bleaty

                                                  "Ewe boring me, plumpo...." Well, you are the nil, TBH.

                                                  Once again, Boring Green signals his surrender with another counter-free post. Because, once again, Boring Green has reached the limits of the poorly-conceived 'arguments' he has swallowed as gospel, only to find that cursory examination has exposed them as just more hype and fanfare.

                                                  And, yet again, again, show me the harm or quit bleating.

                                                  1. Anonymous Coward
                                                    Anonymous Coward

                                                    Waste of time

                                                    Never argue with an idiot, they will only reduce you to their level and then beat you with experience.

  3. gerdesj Silver badge

    Who gets to pay for that

    To be able to record metadata and content implies, in simplistic terms, that twice the capacity was provisioned for telephony than was/is actually required.

    Who on earth paid for the extra bit? I presume the US tax payer. Hope they get value for money on this massive investment. Perhaps the locals paid for it directly - I bet they would be a little annoyed about that.

    I wonder how much extra ahem "necessary overhead" capacity we get to pay for in the UK infrastructure?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Who gets to pay for that

      its worse than that... it means the intrrnational bandwidth must be at least equal the in country simultaneous capacity. But that can probably go down a single fibre such is their capacity.

  4. Mark 85 Silver badge

    Just the beginning

    I suspect that USA isn't the country only guilty of this type of snooping on a massive scale. I suppose, though, we'd need a Russian, Chinese, EU, and maybe a Brit or an Aussie Snowden type to bring the point home that no place is safe or private. The so-called Electronic Age has brought its blessings and its curses. The curses part hasn't yet been fully explored, though I'm sure that there's more revelations due to come out.

    Having said that, there's a disclaimer: Just because everyone is or might be doing it, doesn't make it right. It just makes it insidious.

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: Mark 85 Re: Just the beginning

      ".....no place is safe or private....." If you're a drug-dealer or smuggler, it would seem. I'm sure you paranoid sheeple will skip right past that bit of the article, though.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        re: Matt Bryant Re: Mark 85 Just the beginning

        Cherry-picked that one, didn't you.

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

          "Cherry-picked that one, didn't you." It is so often the one very obvious and simple point that demonstrates the stupidity of the sheeple's bleating, and the fact the exercise was done under a legal warrant and with the strict intention of assisting in prosecuting drug gangs totally undermines the shrieking, melodramatic insistence that 'They are watching ME' as bleated by so many sheep here.

          But to take the dismantling of their paranoid fantasies a step further, how many of them made a call from the Bahamas in the period mentioned? Probably none. Did they stop to think a 100m calls a day is actually not that much, the daily average for the US is well over 3bn calls? Or that the average mobile user spends about half-an-hour a day on calls, so extrapolate by the population of mobe users and you have an inkling of how much actual airtime would have to be listened to, well beyond the capabilities of the staff involved, which is why the majority of the Bahamas sweep would NEVER get listened to by a human being.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

            > Did they stop to think a 100m calls a day is actually not that much, the daily average for the US is well over 3bn calls?

            Who is to say what is not much?

            To record details of phone calls indiscriminately is either right or it is wrong.

            Is stabbing OK, as long as you only stab a very small number of people?

            Is theft OK as long as you don't get too greedy?

            Is it OK as long as the government is doing it?

            It never fails to amaze me how quickly and completely people like Matt are willing to give up the freedom and privacy of others.

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: skelband Re: re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

              ".....Who is to say what is not much?...." I suppose it was a bit much to ask you sheeple to stop hysterically bleating long enough to actually do the maths. I apologise for thinking you might be capable of such mental exercise and I promise to try and not suggest further strain on your obviously over-stretched brain.

              ".....To record details of phone calls indiscriminately is either right or it is wrong....." And once again we're back to the insistence that it must be wrong because ALL the calls just must have been listened to by a human, when the reality is they were not. The vast majority were deleted without ever having been heard by a human ear, but don't let that simple fact get in the way of your melodramatic shrieking.

              ".....Is stabbing OK, as long as you only stab a very small number of people? Is theft OK as long as you don't get too greedy?....." Both criminal acts with a direct effect on the victims, whereas this was legal and warranted activity in the pursuit of criminals. In other words, stop spouting male bovine manure. Instead, please show how anyone other than criminals were actually impacted by this exercise? Oh, you can't, because there was ZERO impact for anyone other than the crims. The only impact to the general public was more earache from the over-loud and automatic bleating of the sheeple.

              ".....It never fails to amaze me how quickly and completely people like Matt are willing to give up the freedom and privacy of others." It never fails to amuse me how complete nonentities like skelband insist anyone would be interested in either their public or private communications. Get over yourself, you're just a paranoid delusional sheeple.

              1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge

                Re: skelband re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

                Matt, for fucks sake can you just stop with the 'sheeple' and accusations of paranoia please, you sound like a stuck record.

                Are you completely incapable of making your arguments without derisory comments to all and sundry?

                Your posts, more often than not, attack the messenger rather than the message. It just makes you look like a complete stoolie

                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                  Facepalm

                  Re: Sir Runcibke Loon Re: skelband re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

                  Start thinking for yourselves for a change then.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019