frank lee bent wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 8:39 am what does alegal mean? Is it supposed to be English? I notice you use it repeatedly.

If you read reviews on existentialist books you'll often find the word 'amoral' used. This means that morals are not considered relevant; things work without morals (however strange and contrary to the original meaning of existentialism that is - I think the original point of existentialism is free will). A- as a prefix means not or without. Here's a dictionary definition of the prefix:

"
"Meaning of “a-” - Learner’s Dictionary
a-
prefix us ​ uk ​ /eɪ/

not, without:
atypical
"

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... nglish/a_2

frank lee bent wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 8:39 am what does alegal mean? Is it supposed to be English? I notice you use it repeatedly.

To give an example of what's alegal, just look at conspiracy crimes. Brainwashing is often de facto alegal. You can read many stories about people (who you may call weak-willed) being drawn into certain groups that convince them of things that are not true and take advantage of their good nature, sometimes for years.

It is however, extremely rare to get a successful prosecution (and few people even discuss subconscious influence - probably don't want the jip). If you want really high-profile examples then watch Anonymous on utube. Here's another one of their masterpieces on conspiracy crime:

That’s the 5th time you mention Anonymous and conspiracy theories and you just used it to define a word that’s not really a word am I following correctly?

They’re coming to get you soon!!!

fax wrote: ↑Mon Oct 29, 2018 1:19 pm That’s the 5th time you mention Anonymous and conspiracy theories and you just used it to define a word that’s not really a word am I following correctly?

They’re coming to get you soon!!!

I'm not overly paranoid, but I'm not naive either. Who's watching you?

Do you need something more concrete Fax?

Here, this video does not use Anonymous to support it. It used real, clued-up people, with real identities. And it's established in MSM-reported fact. It details many examples of alegal mass surveillance that are happening right now. Please do discuss the issues. If you object to my words I'm happy to take a step back and let others do the talking.

So don't take my word for it. Listen to the experts on surveillance conspiracy crime (and it's not a theory - all heavily documented and reported):

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:23 am Then thank goodness we all hail from western democracies where information like this is available. And governments can drag private firms and grill them on privacy protections. And people can demand investigations into the government.

Of course you're right. Democracies definitely have less censorship so far now. Let's hope that the major recent shift illuminated by Max Blumenthal and Jeb Sprague doesn't continue:

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/10/24/f ... n-insider/

But you obviously didn't watch the above documentary. It's not about private companies and the situation for regulation of the Big Police may be described as alegal.

I’m not going to watch the documentary because they told me not to in a book that proves why you are wrong but you probably are not going to read it.