CDZ Words to avoid if you don't want govt spying on you

[Luddly Neddite]

Words to avoid using if you don't want the government spying on you

If you use several of these hundreds of words (such as 'pork,' 'cloud,' 'wave' or 'smart'), there's a chance you might get flagged by the government.

We know that the U.S. government has been secretly monitoring data on the Internet, allegedly for the purpose of scanning for threats to national security. But now thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request, we also know exactly which keywords and phrases the government has been flagging, reports the Daily Mail.
http://www.mnn.com/family/protectio...if-you-dont-want-the-government-spying-on-you
http://www.mnn.com/family/protectio...if-you-dont-want-the-government-spying-on-you
Many of the words on the recently released list are predictable, such as "Al Qaeda," "dirty bomb" or "assassination," but some are more ambiguous — words you might find yourself using in a variety of benign contexts. For instance, typing innocent words like "pork," "El Paso," "cloud," "wave" or "smart" — among with many others — on your Facebook or Twitter profiles might get you flagged for monitoring.


Read the entire list at the link.

Interesting list. If true, we're all under constant surveillance.

(Sorry for the bold. It won't turn off.)

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Have to love living in a free country.

yes, Sir

Home of the Free -- Brave Too

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Always figured a bell rings at NSA when googling nuclear weapons stuff.

 

[CremeBrulee]

I had a brown out incident in which I used the facility to evacuate a weapons grade dirty bomb before I burst. It must have been caused by food poisoning from the swine. My response was to put some enriched white powder in my water.

Context is king.

 

[320 Years of History]

Lord, have mercy! If it's so that the government actually scans for that list of words, I sure hope scanning what must literally be the millions of internet content that contains those words proves to be more helpful than just my perusing the list suggests it ought to be. Perhaps the actual scanning systems require that any given one of the words exist in conjunction with one or several others, or with one or several others of which haven't been disclosed. Perhaps too the venue/vehicle in which the word(s) are found has something to do with it.

Just looking over the list, about 75% of words there are ones I "guestimate" I have used in the past year, and I'm sure I have zero malfeasant intentions against the U.S., its allies or citizens, or anyone else for that matter.

 

[320 Years of History]

Always figured a bell rings at NSA when googling nuclear weapons stuff.

Ditto. It strikes me that just about anyone with a "slightly more so than average curious mind" is bound to trigger something at the NSA.

 

[saveliberty]

Oh flagged, I thought it said flogged, never mind.

 

[Missourian]

An old Arab lived close to New York City for more than 40 years. He would have loved to plant potatoes in his garden, but he is alone, old and weak.

His son is in college in Paris, so the old man sends him an e-mail. He explains the problem: "Beloved son, I am very sad, because I can't plant potatoes in my garden. I am sure, if only you were here, you would help and dig up the garden for me. I love you, Your Father."

The following day, the old man receives a response e-mail from his son: "Beloved Father, please don't touch the garden. It's there that I have hidden 'the THING'. I love you, too, Ahmed"

At 4pm the US Army, The Marines, the FBI, the CIA and the Rangers visit the house of the old man, take the whole garden apart, search every inch, but can't find anything. Disappointed they leave the house.

A day later, the old man receives another e-mail from his son. "Beloved Father, I hope the garden is dug up by now and you can plant your potatoes. That's all I could do for you from here. I love you, Ahmed."

 

[oldsoul]

Wow that is an expansive list. Guess I souldn't discuss the Gas on my work truck possibly becoming an Explosive, I drive a Hazmat truck, if I were to get into a Collision during the upcoming Snow event in my area. That would likely cause a Chemical Spill Incident, maybe even near the Airport I deliver to. Yeah, I souldn't talk about that...LOL

 

[saveliberty]

No small wonder the government is fearful of our citizens. Maybe try to use more commonsense and reduce redistribution efforts for a happier citizenry?

 

[Moonglow]

The NSA can go fuck themselves...

 

[saveliberty]

The NSA can go fuck themselves...

No time, they got us...

 

[Rotagilla]

a nation that won't secure its own borders has no business spying on its own citizens in the "interests" of "national security".

If national security mattered, the borders would be closed and enforced and we wouldn't be taking in 3rd world peasants and "refugees" from cultures that are hostile to ours.

 

[aaronleland]

As long as the words "midget" and "porn" aren't on the list I'm in the clear.

 

[320 Years of History]

a nation that won't secure its own borders has no business spying on its own citizens in the "interests" of "national security".

If national security mattered, the borders would be closed and enforced and we wouldn't be taking in 3rd world peasants and "refugees" from cultures that are hostile to ours.

It's odd to me that you'd conflate whether national security matters with the ethics/morality of offering a helping hand to people who've suffered misfortune.

 

[Rotagilla]

a nation that won't secure its own borders has no business spying on its own citizens in the "interests" of "national security".

If national security mattered, the borders would be closed and enforced and we wouldn't be taking in 3rd world peasants and "refugees" from cultures that are hostile to ours.

It's odd to me that you'd conflate whether national security matters with the ethics/morality of offering a helping hand to people who've suffered misfortune.

Semantic distortion.

syrian "refugees" have no business in america and the president has no business unilaterally making the decision to import them.
We can offer them a "helping hand" in their own lands.

Their "culture" and "religion" are primitive and incompatible with western civilization....but obama knows all that very very well...that's the whole point of shipping them here. Racial revenge politics.

 

[320 Years of History]

a nation that won't secure its own borders has no business spying on its own citizens in the "interests" of "national security".

If national security mattered, the borders would be closed and enforced and we wouldn't be taking in 3rd world peasants and "refugees" from cultures that are hostile to ours.

It's odd to me that you'd conflate whether national security matters with the ethics/morality of offering a helping hand to people who've suffered misfortune.

Semantic distortion.

syrian "refugees" have no business in america and the president has no business unilaterally making the decision to import them.
We can offer them a "helping hand" in their own lands.

Their "culture" and "religion" are primitive and incompatible with western civilization....but obama knows all that very very well...that's the whole point of shipping them here. Racial revenge politics.

??? Nothing you wrote struck me as ambiguous. I don't think I was ambiguous either with what I wrote. So where in our comments is the semantic distortion?

I noticed that you put "refugee" in quotes, as per the definition of "refugee," by the State Department, I would think lots of Syrians qualify. Moreover, seeing as last year we took in only ~130 refugees from Syria, are you stating that they, or the majority of them, have been show to be national security threats or something other than refugees? Or are your statements pure conjecture on your part and based on nothing other than those 130 people being of Syrian nationality and being Muslim to the extent that they were.

Your claims of incompatibility with Western civilization are unfounded and smack of exactly the same disdain we heard in years past. (U.S. public seldom has welcomed refugees into country) I don't have a lot of experience with Muslims, but I have some -- classmates at school, friends of my kids, neighbors of friends of mine, and that sort of thing. I have zero indication that their lifestyles and culture are incompatible with American culture. They enjoy the same video games, have the same concerns that I do re: family, enjoy socializing, are happy to enjoy the trappings of good fortune, and so on. I haven't met any who drink alcohol or eat pork, but so what? They don't want a hotdog or ribs at a barbecue. To an individual, each of them is a God fearing human being with a high set of personal standards of conduct and respect for others. Indeed, in terms of their character, integrity, respect for others, and education, the Muslims I know best a great many non-Muslims whom I've encountered but to whom I wouldn't give the time of day because they are proles and boorish curs, despite their being non-Muslim or American citizens.

 

[Care4all]

as colin powell said, the pottery barn rule comes in to play,

you break it, you own it.

 

[Rotagilla]

a nation that won't secure its own borders has no business spying on its own citizens in the "interests" of "national security".

If national security mattered, the borders would be closed and enforced and we wouldn't be taking in 3rd world peasants and "refugees" from cultures that are hostile to ours.

It's odd to me that you'd conflate whether national security matters with the ethics/morality of offering a helping hand to people who've suffered misfortune.

Semantic distortion.

syrian "refugees" have no business in america and the president has no business unilaterally making the decision to import them.
We can offer them a "helping hand" in their own lands.

Their "culture" and "religion" are primitive and incompatible with western civilization....but obama knows all that very very well...that's the whole point of shipping them here. Racial revenge politics.

??? Nothing you wrote struck me as ambiguous. I don't think I was ambiguous either with what I wrote. So where in our comments is the semantic distortion?

I noticed that you put "refugee" in quotes, as per the definition of "refugee," by the State Department, I would think lots of Syrians qualify. Moreover, seeing as last year we took in only ~130 refugees from Syria, are you stating that they, or the majority of them, have been show to be national security threats or something other than refugees? Or are your statements pure conjecture on your part and based on nothing other than those 130 people being of Syrian nationality and being Muslim to the extent that they were.

Your claims of incompatibility with Western civilization are unfounded and smack of exactly the same disdain we heard in years past. (U.S. public seldom has welcomed refugees into country) I don't have a lot of experience with Muslims, but I have some -- classmates at school, friends of my kids, neighbors of friends of mine, and that sort of thing. I have zero indication that their lifestyles and culture are incompatible with American culture. They enjoy the same video games, have the same concerns that I do re: family, enjoy socializing, are happy to enjoy the trappings of good fortune, and so on. I haven't met any who drink alcohol or eat pork, but so what? They don't want a hotdog or ribs at a barbecue. To an individual, each of them is a God fearing human being with a high set of personal standards of conduct and respect for others. Indeed, in terms of their character, integrity, respect for others, and education, the Muslims I know best a great many non-Muslims whom I've encountered but to whom I wouldn't give the time of day because they are proles and boorish curs, despite their being non-Muslim or American citizens.

yeah..that's all great...more semantic distortions...I'm not going to parse words over what a "refugee" is...it means whatever you pay a lawyer to interpret it says it means...

Here...once again.

syrian "refugees" have no business in america and the president has no business unilaterally making the decision to import them.
We can offer them a "helping hand" in their own lands.

Their "culture" and "religion" are primitive and incompatible with western civilization....but obama knows all that very very well...that's the whole point of shipping them here. Racial revenge politics


EDIT:
Point is..that just like you look for language you can exploit to purposely misinterpret for political gain....another equally clever lawyer can use the language of the law to demand it be strictly enforced.

 

[320 Years of History]

a nation that won't secure its own borders has no business spying on its own citizens in the "interests" of "national security".

If national security mattered, the borders would be closed and enforced and we wouldn't be taking in 3rd world peasants and "refugees" from cultures that are hostile to ours.

It's odd to me that you'd conflate whether national security matters with the ethics/morality of offering a helping hand to people who've suffered misfortune.

Semantic distortion.

syrian "refugees" have no business in america and the president has no business unilaterally making the decision to import them.
We can offer them a "helping hand" in their own lands.

Their "culture" and "religion" are primitive and incompatible with western civilization....but obama knows all that very very well...that's the whole point of shipping them here. Racial revenge politics.

??? Nothing you wrote struck me as ambiguous. I don't think I was ambiguous either with what I wrote. So where in our comments is the semantic distortion?

I noticed that you put "refugee" in quotes, as per the definition of "refugee," by the State Department, I would think lots of Syrians qualify. Moreover, seeing as last year we took in only ~130 refugees from Syria, are you stating that they, or the majority of them, have been show to be national security threats or something other than refugees? Or are your statements pure conjecture on your part and based on nothing other than those 130 people being of Syrian nationality and being Muslim to the extent that they were.

Your claims of incompatibility with Western civilization are unfounded and smack of exactly the same disdain we heard in years past. (U.S. public seldom has welcomed refugees into country) I don't have a lot of experience with Muslims, but I have some -- classmates at school, friends of my kids, neighbors of friends of mine, and that sort of thing. I have zero indication that their lifestyles and culture are incompatible with American culture. They enjoy the same video games, have the same concerns that I do re: family, enjoy socializing, are happy to enjoy the trappings of good fortune, and so on. I haven't met any who drink alcohol or eat pork, but so what? They don't want a hotdog or ribs at a barbecue. To an individual, each of them is a God fearing human being with a high set of personal standards of conduct and respect for others. Indeed, in terms of their character, integrity, respect for others, and education, the Muslims I know best a great many non-Muslims whom I've encountered but to whom I wouldn't give the time of day because they are proles and boorish curs, despite their being non-Muslim or American citizens.

yeah..that's all great...more semantic distortions...I'm not going to parse words over what a "refugee" is...it means whatever you pay a lawyer to interpret it says it means...

Here...once again.

syrian "refugees" have no business in america and the president has no business unilaterally making the decision to import them.
We can offer them a "helping hand" in their own lands.

Their "culture" and "religion" are primitive and incompatible with western civilization....but obama knows all that very very well...that's the whole point of shipping them here. Racial revenge politics

Your repeating the post doesn't lend veracity to it.