25 October 2007


What's that they say? Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't out to get you! How about: No one ever got shot or busted for being too paranoid! With all that's going on in the world nowadays, you don't to need to be an alien abductee to understand that your world might not be as private as you would like.
Whether it's a trade secret that you're trying to protect, or you're just foolin' around on the wife/husband, you can't be too careful. So you've got your papers cross-cut shredded, your office has 3 surveillance cameras, all your emails are encrypted, and your documents are on an encrypted, phantom drive on a remote off-shore server.
What about your phone calls? Any one from the business rivals(1) to the feds(2 )to your boyfriends wife(3) can be listening in on your calls. Don't you think it's about time to protect your spoken words, too?
It used to be that encrypting phone calls was the territory of governments. The equipment was expensive, and the resulting calls were scratchy and broken. Those days are gone. For anywhere from $1600 to possibly under $100(4) you can get a phone scrambler that will guarantee your privacy. Of course, you will need at least two of them; one for each end of the conversation
The new scramblers on the market can be left on all the time, as they recognize a
compatible unit on the other end and automatically encrypt calls. If the receiving end has no scrambler, the call goes through normally.
If you
're electronically inclined and adventurous, you can even try building your own device(5). No guarantees on how, how well or even if this one works.
I have no econ
omic interest in any of the companies whose links I have provided. I do have an interest in preserving our(my) absolute right to talk to anyone I choose and say anything I want without someone else listening in for whatever nefarious reason they may may have in their warped little brains.
Stay safe. Stay private.
(1) http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1989_cr/s890418-bug.htm , http://www.tscmvideo.com/synopsis-tscm-video.html
(2) http://www.privacy.org/pi/issues/tapping/ , http://www.alternet.org/rights/32218/
(3) http://www.divorcesource.com/research/edj/cases/wiretapping.shtml
(4) http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,2081513,00.htm , http://cellular.co.za/accessories/encryption/cryptophone_gsm_phone_encryption.htm , http://www.spyworld.com/Scramblers_Encryptions.htm , http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/the-secure-phone-miser-telephone-conversation-encryption-device-175953.php
(5) http://www.schneier.com/essay-099.html

05 October 2007


Much of the world wide news media, and many people in the US government (most of them Democrats) would like you to believe that there never were any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq; that the military has never found any and that Saddam Hussein did, in fact comply with the U. N, destroy all of his biological and chemical weapons, and abandon his nuclear arms ambitions.
Is that true? Has the Iraq war been a complete blunder? Was the entire justification for the Iraq invasion a mistake, or possibly even a complete fabrication?
If this is true, either the governments of about 30 countries are totally incompetent and complete morons (always a possibility), or Tony Blair, Vladimir Putin, Angela Merkel, Jacques Chirac, Hu Jintao and George W. Bush, along with the governing, military and intelligence agencies of all the other U.N. security council members (1) conspired to decieve the entire world population.
If it is not true, and there in fact were (or are), WMDs in Iraq, why would so many of our congress men and women, presidential candidates and journalists want us to believe otherwise?
The truth is, since 2003, coalition forces have recovered over 500 munitions that contain mustard gas and sarin nerve agent. According to a recently unclassified document, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions still exist, . (2,3,4) Both sarin and mustard gas are classified as weapons of mass destruction according to the United Nations resolution 687. (5,6)
These are not the only WMDs recovered. The whole world new that, prior to the US invasion, Saddam Hussein had WMDs. He purchased them. He produced them. He used them; against his own people. If he had so many, where did they go? Could they have simply disappeared?
The most likely possibility is that they were hidden; either inside of Iraq, or in other countries after the UN inspectors were thrown out of the country (7), in an effort to thwart the world community from locating and destroying them (8, 9,10).
Iraq is a huge country, and less than 20% has been thoroughly searched. In 2003, Coalition forces found fighter jets under the desert sand(11,12,13). More sarin, mustard and even nuclear devices could very easily be hidden all over the country. We know that at least five secret storage bunkers around Baghdad, Basra and Tikrit held chemical weapons(14). If we are unable to locate these and other WMD caches due to the constraints of the war or (God forbid) a complete pull-out of American forces, Al Queda and other fanatics could very well get their hands on them. Should that happen, 9/11 just might look like a church social.
So why would anyone in the government and media deny these facts, lie to the public about the WMDs and play down or cover up these discoveries? What diabolical agenda do the candidates, pundits and others hell-bent on convincing the public of their lies have that they are willing to expose the whole world to these terrors? Isn't this eerily similar to the Holocaust denial?
I don't have the answers. Just the questions. What do you think?
1) United Nations Security Council resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, and 1284
2) http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200606/NAT20060621e.html
3) http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1435
4) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin
6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustard_gas
7) http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1123
8) http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/2/18/233023.shtml
9) http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/11738
10) http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=55
11) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1022824/posts
12) http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/foxbat.htm
14) http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/31/1080544556813.html?from=storyrhs