Is it fair to say that in a Corporate War situation with Stasi-like Full Dominance Surveillance/Hacking, Advanced Interrogation Techniques, Weather Weapons, Metering, Top Six (Energy, Media, Defence) Companies Monopolising and The Rules of Corporate Take-over applied to each and every 'competitor' in their war i.e. You The Individual.Isn't it ture that cyber-attack-sponsored Corporate War is an Ugly Game that is NDA'd beyond the moral crimes it breaks?
You're only an asset to the Corporate War Machine when you a) shut your fucking mouth and b) buy more over-packeaged shit. No? Hey, Xmas is gonna rape you from behind. And don't forget that, even though this is a Carbon Concerned Century, we still launch POISONOUS FIREWORKS and light POLLUTING FIRES on November 5th and January 1st every year. What fucking idiots.
For example: with the advanced (and still secret) techniques of digital surveillance open to them at the time (ten years prior to the Edward Snowden leaks) is it fair to say that NSA knew about September 11th 2001 terror attack as GCHQ knew about the 7th July 2005 terror attack? Is this a valid question to ask? Or are we to expect that their surveillance network failed on those particular days like CCTV footage on London Underground/buses and at Pentagon? Surely they would have 'seen the chatter' of a valid long-term-planned terror event such as this? Surely they would have, at least, been aware of the insertion of fake flight path data onto radar screens on the day of 9/11? Would that have Red Flag'd? Was it all an OUTSIDE JOB?
Isn't the REAL DANGER with a Digital Surveillance State as 'packet splicey' as the one we have been under for all those years is THE PLANTING OF EVIDENCE ON TARGETED COMPUTERS to reinforce their agenda?
Remember: the most important role of ADVANCED INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES is 'what you put in' not what you get out.
