The Black Vault

by **Wing-Zero** » Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:50 am

greeney2 wrote:
Nigfis wrote:Remember this from Obama, just recently? : "And there's no country on earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.".

Nazi V1 and V2 rockets, and the UK!

I think you missed the point, but yes; the Brits didn't tolerate it. Why should the Pakistanis tolerate it from us? Why should ANY country tolerate it from any other country?

by **greeney2** » Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:07 pm

There is no comparison between the Nazi's raining rockets, just like Hamas is, on indiscriminate residential areas with no military objective, to Pakistan. Pakistan, is a different thing altogether, where nobody is trying to kill civilians for the sake of killing them. Pakistan has been a safe haven for terrrorists taking refuge, in remote areas, and in in Bin Ladens case, right next to an elite military base. Nobody has launched missile to fall just anywhere, they are laser or GPS aimed at known places. Ye,s there have been some bad accidents, and civilians have died. Pakistan has also proven to have not been forthcoming, and the reason why the USA did not include them in the knowledge were going in for Bin Laden, and others. Every effort to not have collateral damage is taken, which is not the case with Hamas, who isn't even aiming at a military target.

by **Nigfis** » Wed Nov 21, 2012 1:04 pm

greeney2 wrote:Does it make a difference if shoplifting cameras are in the eye of a mannequin, or the eye in the sky like Las Vegas, or riding shotgun on the stagecoach in the old west? There are too many dishonest people out stealing. Ever seen shoplifters caught on camera, they get pretty brazen? I'm glad they catch the f^%$ing idiots, they make us all pay for it.

No. I have never seen anyone being 'caught' on cctv Greeney. Nor have you. You have been fooled by the hype. Very clever it is too, the hype. Look at all the programs one can see now about 'caught on camera' and other related made-for-tv titles where the host, usually the most condescending prick program host available talks to you like you are children.

CCTV does nothing but record crimes. That's it. It Records.
The crime still happens anyway, cameras or no.

You have been hoodwinked into thinking that allowing crimes to happen, and don't forget, the victim is still the victim, then following up/catching the criminal, is a good way to police people. It is not. Revenge-Policing I call it. It allows the victim to feel a sense of revenge after being attacked/robbed or whatever. Policing is supposed to be about crime-prevention, not clearing-up afterwards.

Greeney, how would you feel if Mrs Greeney was mugged and beaten somewhere in broad daylight, or in a bright city-centre where there were plenty of cctv cameras, but no actual uniformed police on the scene?
I ask because, sure as eggs are eggs, more cctv means less police on patrol using their own visibility and their uniforms as crime-prevention.

CCTV is the biggest scam our countries have ever had pulled on them, and there have been a few.

You are allowing even more of your freedoms to vanish because you are scared of crime that, in the main, doesn't even affect you. And when it does, all it takes is for the attacker to wear a hoody or balaclava, and your wife's' assailants are unrecognisable.... But guess what else? The proponents of cctv will still claim the crime was 'caught on cctv', just because a camera, somewhere hidden, recorded it. And if you're lucky, and sign the right wavers, you may even get to see your wife being beaten on tv. :Doh:

by **greeney2** » Wed Nov 21, 2012 3:55 pm

Your logic is astounding. Who do you think would be putting these cctv mannequins in the department stores? Maybe it is the stores themselves who have millions shoplifted every year. Who do you think put cameras in convenience stores, gas stations, by ATM's machines? Again the stores themselves, because of robbery and people getting murdered everyday? How about Las Vegas, where people cheat on the gambling table, it has been a known and accepted thing a long time.

NIgfis a lot of people do get mugged in broad daylight, even in the UK, and a lot of criminals have been put away because of these cameras. Not very often is there ever a policeman at the scene when a crime is taking place, so not sure where your logic is again. Nobody would like to see their loved ones mugged, or hit and run, or carjacked, or purse snatched, but I would be very glad to see them caught on tape and prosecuted for it. You can make a mountain out of any molehill, and exaggerate what you think is the result of these kind of things, but your freedom is in no way altered. When shoplifters, muggers, and criminals get away with murder, that is a lot more oppressive to me.

by **Nigfis** » Thu Nov 22, 2012 3:37 am

greeney2 wrote:Your logic is astounding.

Nope. Just logic. You wouldn't be astounded by it if you understood it.

Who do you think would be putting these cctv mannequins in the department stores? Maybe it is the stores themselves who have millions shoplifted every year. Who do you think put cameras in convenience stores, gas stations, by ATM's machines? Again the stores themselves, because of robbery and people getting murdered everyday? How about Las Vegas, where people cheat on the gambling table, it has been a known and accepted thing a long time.

The mannequins are only one example Greeney, as I have said. I have no real truck with stores' cctv because I have the choice not to enter shops that use it. Provided I know I am being recorded going about my lawful business. Hiding cctv in the eyes of mannequins (for example) is rather a different case though, even you must be aware of that. Yes, even Greeney must be aware. Its the secret filming of people like me, doing nothing illegal that I object to. And if only it ended at mannequins.... Military Drones, flying over your own cities. Covert cctv and ALPR (Automatic License Plate Reader/Recognition) systems (ANPR here) which log every journey you make. 'Smart' street lights that record your conversations as well as watch your every move. Shall we go on to removing shoes or having your junk felt at every airport check-in??
How scared must you be to support this cradle-to-the-grave spying on every activity, every penny spent and on what?

And you know what all this screams? It demonstrates amply that you have already lost the 'war on terror.' because you are so afraid you will accept any form of spying into your private lives in order to 'keep you safe.' How sad is that?

NIgfis a lot of people do get mugged in broad daylight, even in the UK, and a lot of criminals have been put away because of these cameras.

Deliberately missing the point again..... :roll:

How do you think you'll feel when told that, "Sorry, there wasn't a cop on duty because we spent all the money on these cctv systems, but look, here we can see the masked man kicking your wife into unconsciousness?"

Not very often is there ever a policeman at the scene when a crime is taking place, so not sure where your logic is again.

How on earth can you write a sentence like that, and still not get it?
Policemen prevent crime. That's what they do. Its their job. Even the sight of a policeman/woman is enough to prevent many criminals from doing the do.
Take those cops away in favour of cctv cameras and what happens?
Yunno, I have an idea you might even be able to answer this question on your own this time.

Nobody would like to see their loved ones mugged, or hit and run, or carjacked, or purse snatched, but I would be very glad to see them caught on tape and prosecuted for it.

... BUT THEY NEVER ARE.... A hat Greeney! That's all it takes!

You can make a mountain out of any molehill, and exaggerate what you think is the result of these kind of things, but your freedom is in no way altered. When shoplifters, muggers, and criminals get away with murder, that is a lot more oppressive to me.

Well maybe now you 'get it' and understand that cctv does not prevent crime. It only records it in the hope someone calls for it AND the criminal is dumb enoug to not disguise themselves by wearing a woolly balaclava.

by **CodeBlackv2** » Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:14 pm

Nigfis, what is the organization behind this Global Peace Index? How did they calculate the economic value of "peace"? Sounds like they forgot to factor in the economic benefit of war. And before you balk at that consider the endless claims by the peaceniks that the wars of the last century were for money. If that is true then there must be economic benefit from it.

How much economic loss was there from 911?

by **Nigfis** » Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:48 pm

CodeBlackv2 wrote:Nigfis, what is the organization behind this Global Peace Index? How did they calculate the economic value of "peace"? Sounds like they forgot to factor in the economic benefit of war. And before you balk at that consider the endless claims by the peaceniks that the wars of the last century were for money. If that is true then there must be economic benefit from it.

How much economic loss was there from 911?

I'm sure I'm not qualified to answer your questions off-hand CodeBlackv2, but if you want to question their methodology the Global Peace Index itselfis a good place to start I'd say... :thumbup:

My guess is that your angles are covered too.

Ooh! About 9/11 and money. I don't know if you recall this, but the day before that murderous event, old Rumsfelt made a speech saying that there was some kind of a 'hole' in the US's economics, counting in $Trillions?

.. Ah! I can't see this, but from the description, it sounds like it:....

I wonder who it was that made a clean getaway with that amount of tax-payers money? The perfect crime, do you think?

I would also hazard a guess that there was no economic loss at all from 9/11, when offset by the military spending that immediately followed, and seems to be growing exponentially even now.

How do you feel about these drones being used in US airspace to police you Codey?

by **blackvault** » Sun Nov 25, 2012 10:32 am

RT wrote:Brit brother: Drones to watch over UK streets

Unmanned police drones, comparable to those used in war zones such as Afghanistan, could soon be secretly watching over the streets of UK cities, according to a National Police Air Service director.

The unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are being considered to monitor crowded events in Britain, such as concerts and festivals, as soon as the aerial units become cost-effective.

“I see unmanned systems as part of the future. There is an aircraft over London all the time — every day, giving images back. Why does it need to be a very expensive helicopter? If somebody gave me an unmanned system that I could use as I use a helicopter at half the cost, within the regulations, I would buy it tomorrow.” Superintendent Richard Watson said in a presentation to the defense industry, reports The Times.

Some police precincts have tried using the remote-controlled system to curb crime. Now the idea is to implement the drone policy nationwide.
Watson said that one manufacturer had proposed an 81-million-pound (around US$127 million) system in a deal that far exceeds the annual National Police Air Service budget of a little over 60 million pounds ($95 million), reports The Telegraph.

The UK already has a drone manufacturing industry and infrastructure. In August 2005, a contract was awarded to Thales UK, worth around 700 million pounds ($1.1 billion), to create the Watchkeeper Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Program, to support the UK’s war effort in Afghanistan, reports Defense Industry Daily. The program was also designed to create around 2000 high-quality manufacturing jobs in the country.

Ultramodern drones will also be deployed for the first time in Northern Ireland on Friday in a missing person search, reports the Belfast Telegraph.
Earlier this month, The Mail reported that UAVs will be used to scoop out terrorists, smugglers and illegal immigrants along Britain's shores as part of the EU wide project.
The European Commission has allocated 260 million pounds ($412 million) for the “Eurosur” project, which also includes a surveillance plan to patrol the Mediterranean coast.
Simultaneously, several schemes are underway in UK, aiming to develop civilian roles for systems based on the drones used to locate and destroy militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
British defense companies are testing the high-tech military-grade cameras on UAVs over the Irish Sea.

At the same time, The Mail has discovered that Kent Police are involved in a 3-million-pound ($5 millions) venture with partners in the UK, France and the Netherlands to study the use of drones to guard the English Channel.

Source: http://rt.com/news/uk-drone-spy-citizens-471/

by **Nigfis** » Sun Nov 25, 2012 10:49 am

Just a cut-and-paste John?
No opinion?

by **blackvault** » Sun Nov 25, 2012 11:03 am

Just adding to the information... of course I have an opinion.

The Black Vault

So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Share On:

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

Re: So How's It Going, The "War On Terror"?

The Social Network Buzz

Who is online