Most people are okay with what is going on but, they do not realize that even though they"aren't doing anything", it is like
having a policeman follow you around 24/7, even in your most private moments.

Anybody ever see Colossus: The Forbin Project 1970.

It is even worse than that. It is like in Communism, where EVERYONE is watching you and listening to you. Even the slightest hint that you might be an "enemy of the people" (terrorist) and you would disappear and probably taken to a gulag (Guantanamo) or just interrogated and shot. Yes, it brings back memories ...

Actually more like The Truman Show, where your whole life is a TV show.

Even though it is a comedy, this is really serious.

Maybe they might force me to use windows. That's torture right there.

Anyway the blame for all this are the sickos who want to hurt our great USA.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-va...g-on-consumers
Can we change the message to something like "Big Brother is watching you", or "I see you" ?

Australia has at least 2 web traffic monitoring centres and you don't see us screaming blue murder over it. I saw on TV the other night, yes they actually show us these things, where one of them is. So far ours has been extremely successfull in foiling various forms of criminal activity including but not limited to terrorism and international child abuse groups.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...822-24mur.html

Ask yourself this question, what is the price you are willing to pay for your, your family, your childrens, safety?

Personally this paranoia, yes it is paranoia, that some people keep exhibiting in LQ is tiring. This continuous "everyone is out to get you" thought process must end up developing into a serious psychotic illness that does you and everyone around you no good. Get off your PC, stop talkng to cyber friends via the internet, go out into the fresh air and sunshine take a deep breath and thank whatever that you are alive and healthy.

I don't care for these accusations. BTW, are you a certified psychiatrist ?

...and there you go again spreading FUD. Please stop that.


BTW, what's the common medical definition of "being paranoid"?

Well, "paranoia" is a delusion (strong but false belief in spite of superior evidence against it) of persecution (that others are out to harm them).

There is also paranoid personality disorder:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoi...ality_disorder

There is also paranoid schizophrenia, but that is much more severe and includes hallucinations.

I don't qualify for either, and nor do most people. Also remember that it is somewhat subjective in that there has to be superior evidence against the "delusion", otherwise it is not a delusion.

For many of these conspiracy theories, there is no superior evidence against it (or for it), but in fact there is clear and superior evidence of a cover-up and misinformation.

The gov'mnt itself qualifies for 1-6 of paranoid personality disorder, although it is not meant for organizations ... someone up there qualifies.

That is quite different to the warrantless searches in the US.

http://www.minterellison.com/publica...update-201305/

I don;t care if you care or not.

Fact, you believe others are out to get you. Fact, theya re not and they don't care about you.

I'm more qualified in psychiatry than you are in Medicine.

So others have noticed.

Thank you.

You know, for someone who is supposedly of superior intellect and has a huge font of medical knowledge it never ceases to amaze me that you have to resort to wikipedia to back your claims. Don't you think it is about time you used your font of knowledge and actually pulled something out of a worthwhile source, e.g. a medical journal for medical issues.

I supplied one item as an example. We are tracked and it does not bother me at all. I'm not going to jump up and down and claim my privacy is being violated when the well being of children (in Australia and around the globe) is being protected from scum. We live in a very different day and age and I don't have a problem with much of this purely because I'd rather my family be safe than find out after the poo has hit the fan that something could have been done. There will always be some civil libertarian somewhere crying foul, I wonder what they would cry if it was their family who were hurt or killed.

Another instance where people can't have it both ways.

There is a big difference bwtween a system that requires a warrant to acess information to one where the inteligence agencies and police forces can gather information without a warrant.

You can use the 'please someone think of the childern' arguement if you want...but if the system here is 'extremely successfull' then warrantless searches are an overreaction.

Not after the poo hits the fan and you get everyone crying that the authorities didn't do enough to stop it.
can I? gee thanks for giving me permission :rolleyes:
There is always a but. Hark back to my 1st sentence in this post for my belief with regards to your statement. Now hark back to my previous post where I said and you might understand that I have no time at all for civil libertarians who cry when things don't go their way. By all means have an opinion, and let me have mine, but don't cry if something happens and then say something like "why didn't they stop them from doing this?" I'm all for watching scum and stopping them in their tracks before they do damage, not only to kids but to society in general, if that means "big brother is watching" then so be it.

If you do not qualify then how would you explain your unceasing efforts to spread FUD anyway? *Note I'm not trying to psycho-analyse you but I would like to understand your apparently strong motives for doing so even when gently nudged not to do so without providing proof of evidence.
*BTW thanks for mentioning DSM. That brings back memories. I first read it when I was 17 IIRC.


Generally speaking critical thinking may require instilling doubt. If that is done to for example force re-evaluation one can view that as having a clear purpose. Spreading incomplete information or deliberately spreading information that is not based on reason or evidence, too has a purpose except it addresses aspects that may not necessarily contribute to solving the question. It takes on a completely different meaning if it stems from ignorance or a perverse pleasure to agitate, misguide, corrupt, undermine or otherwise sway opinion without ever feeling compelled to present correct information in the first place.
So I have to ask you to present authoritative, unambiguous information as related to "TOR being pushed and promoted suggesting that something is behind them too". Thanks in advance.