Zachary Amaranth said:
Yes, I'm sure lifestyle mags frequently include the purchase of bomb-making chemicals and analysis of structural weak points of locations of interests. Your "lifestyle" column almost certainly has little to do with that list, and since these are not automatic indicators (though you pretended otherwise).
The magazine is called 'Super Interessante' (super interesting, roughly translated) it doesn't discuss one specific subject, but rather a number of subjects while providing commentaries on real events, you know, like minor crimes, bombings, terrorist cells in Europe (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETA ) which have taken shelter here, the run of the mill police bust or even about videogames and their effect in society.
Which probably won't get you flagged in itself.
No, but you can't take one thing out of context and call me out on it.
Oh, well that changes everything. The FBI will be all over you.
Sarcasm... nice, well played...
You were raising awareness by being deceitful, and it worked. The cast majority of people in this thread believed you, and now you're trying to say you weren't being deceitful.
And by the way, "playing the obvious troll" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
I suppose that really is a matter of interpretation but okay, let's run with it.
And yes, maybe the subtleties of the english language still elude me, after all I'm not a native english speaker. What I know was mostly self taught, so the intricate workings of internet slang coming out of my mouth might not mean the same to you than they do to me.
No, you're not. I doubt you're anywhere near close, especially with the biggest ones.
Alright, let's break the list down:
- Are overly concerned about privacy, attempts to shield the screen from view of
others - Guilty
- Always pay cash or use credit card(s) in different name(s) - I pay cash 90% of times, because taxes here cause most shops to not take cards unless the bill is higher than ?5.
- Apparently use tradecraft: lookout, blocker or someone to distract employees - This one I don't do, mostly because I tend to go there alone. Although I will wait for the line to clear out before getting up and going up to the register.
- Act nervous or suspicious behavior inconsistent with activities - If I'm waiting on a specific review of one of my pieces, I'll be nervous as hell and no one else there will know why, unless they ask.
- Are observed switching SIM cards in cell phone or use of multiple cell phones - Like I said, 2 phones, 3 SIMs.
- Travel illogical distance to use Internet Café - Okay it's only like 4 miles, but illogical by what standart? It's not just subjective, it's just silly.
- Evidence of a residential based internet provider (signs on to Comcast, AOL,
etc.) - Like I said, my internet at home sucks, so if I have to leave the house to get a decent connection I will login to my ISP's page and send them yet another passive agressive e-mail.
- Use of anonymizers, portals, or other means to shield IP address - I use TOR when I'm researching especially "touchy" subjects.
- Suspicious or coded writings, use of code word sheets, cryptic ledgers, etc. - I've written 5 pieces on the Portuguese Freemasonry, their works were riddled with codes and cryptic decoding ledgers are the easiest way to translate their works to the general public.
- Encryption or use of software to hide encrypted data in digital photos, etc. - I use Linux as my main OS, everything in my home folder is encrypted, as is every .zip, .tar.gz or .pdf file I e-mail people.
- Suspicious communications using VOIP or communicating through a PC game - Once again, subjective. How does the average Joe discern suspicious talk from abbreviations commonly used in online game communities?
- Download content of extreme/radical nature with violent themes - Already mentioned above, sometimes I have to research such themes in order to provide an educated opinion.
- Gather information about vulnerable infrastructure or obtain photos, maps or diagrams of transportation, sporting venues, or populated locations - after the Madrid train bombings I had to look up various details regarding the events in hopes of raising some awareness in my own country, you know, in order to prevent it from happening here.
- Purchase chemicals, acids, hydrogen peroxide, acetone, fertilizer, etc. - Doesn't happen very often, I'll admit, but I've used the online pharmaceutical websites to purchase medication.
-Download or transfer files with ?how-to? content such as:
- Content of extreme/radical nature with violent themes - Guilty
- Anarchist Cookbook, explosives or weapons information - Partially guilty, I don't research these extensively
- Military tactics, equipment manuals, chemical or biological information - Guilty
- Terrorist/revolutionary literature - Guilty (Freemasonry, ETA, etc)
- Preoccupation with press coverage of terrorist attacks - Guilty (see above)
- Defensive tactics, police or government information - Guilty
- Information about timers, electronics, or remote transmitters / receivers - Guilty, after all I do have a Master's in Electronics and Telecommunications
Guilty of 17 out of 21 - 80.95%, missed by around 9%
We post deceptive claims and then complain that once in a while someone actually reads our source material and calls them on it?
More sarcasm?... fine, I just debunked that one on the flyer breakdown.
It is when you're the one calling it coincidental or linking them, and you're guilty of both. This is such a Fox News argument. "Well, I made the affirmative argument, but WHO'S TO SAY?"
Well, first of all, I'm flattered. I didn't think I was nowhere near good enough to actually be compared to a professional news network, even if their cred is next to null. Second, bad comparison!
Look, you're a journalist, right? I'm a journalist, too. I may only write freelance regional pieces, but that should be more than enough "cred" in this instance. I think we both understand that educated people should look into and verify this sort of thing. Of course, I wouldn't hold you to the same standards as what you're published, but you really should know better. And even cursory research should tell you the FBI had been making this case against Megaupload for at least half a year. There's no reason to claim that this is anything other than coincidence. To call it fishy, to say it even looks that way, is to say "I did not do the research."
They had been working on it for 5 months, yet none of the arrests were people of any significance within MegaUpload, the owner didn't even get charges pressed on him, but I won't get into that. Or the fact that those arrested received sentences higher than most murderers/rapists ever did.
Which appears to include you. But again, they've been saying this for ages. This is not something that happened "A week later." you may have found one article proclaiming it, but that's like accusing them of passing the NDAA in response to Megaupload or the death of SOPA simply because you first heard about it a week later.
That's poor understanding of the subject and utterly disingenuous, especially since you said things not about the source material.
Maybe I am a fan of a little conspiracy theory, makes the world less dull. Maybe I don't care enough about the Federal Bureau of Investigation branding people like me as terrorists, but that's only because I live in Europe, atm, and it causes me to get some news later than you do.
Too bad you can't unfire the cannon of false claims and make that valid.
Again with the sarcasm?...
Sarcasm is quite easy to determine in prose if one pays attention. It might be the sort of attention that would have been able to avert this sort of thread, so perhaps you don't do it. If it was that hard to determine sarcasm in the written form, satire would have been a dead art in print the day after writing was invented.
But for the record, that was less sarcastic than it was sardonic.
And as much as I'd like to be able to discuss semantics with you, I don't think I have the english know-how to make it interesting.
But please, do go on, I'm loving the back and forth... and no, that's not sarcasm.
