#BigBrother is in the house!! Well, your house and mine, via our webcams. #notcool (via DemocracyNow.org)

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/k-PUqHyrit/

I guess we've known for a while that your webcam could be hacked by those who know how (safe to assume NSA has a few people who do) but I this is the first time I've heard of this "Operation Optic Nerve" which the NSA and the UK's GCHQ used to grab image and video streams en masse and save them for later perusal. Here's the most alarming bit from the Democracy Now piece:

The program was reportedly used for experiments in "automated facial recognition" as well as to monitor terrorism suspects. A more accurate name for the "Optic Nerve" program may have been "Peeping Tom," because it ended up collecting a large number of sexually explicit images. According to the documents, between 3 and 11 percent of the Yahoo webcam images contained what the GCHQ called "undesirable nudity."

In other words, they're just grabbing everything and watching enough of it to know that they've gone too far. Surely, we, as Americans--no--as human beings have the right to not have our clotheless bodies seen by people without our permission.

Read/watch all of Democracy Now's coverage of this--it's a real window into how our government has gone over the line and doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

And people say Google Glass is invasive?

AP reports: NSA phone record collection ruled unconstitutional. I love how we need a judge to tell us this.

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/h_tUJoyrut/

Yeah, this is just sad. You know who is supposed to enforce the law first? Nooo, not the police--the individual. You and me and our leaders, we all have to enforce the law. The law isn't there for people to ignore it until they get caught--it's there as the last level of protection against the criminal act being committed. In our every day lives, we (hopefully) ask ourselves if what we are doing is wrong in anyway. Our leaders, when deciding to collect our phone call info in bulk, CLEARLY did not ask this question of themselves.

And if they did, you seriously have to wonder how they could have answered "Yes, I believe that collecting the phone records of MILLIONS OF AMERICANS is perfectly moral and legal."

Now, more than ever, it's painfully obvious how corrupt our leaders are. I mean, if we live in a free country, that means that we can generally do what we want and that our government CANNOT.

Anyway, check out the original AP article for the details.

io9 blogs on Evan Booth, who devised weapons built from items found inside an airport, after you go through security.

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/h3hjbnSroA/

From the original post on io9:

Shotguns are not allowed through airport security. But what does that matter if you can build one from items purchased in an airport gift shop? The break-action shotgun pictured above was made from Red Bull cans, a hair dryer, batteries and a can of Axe body spray – and it can blast a handful of pocket change through a sheet of drywall.

My dad always says that if someone wants to hurt you bad enough, they'll find a way to do it. However, it looks like they don't even have to try that hard. All they have to do is get a little clever. To me, knowing that this is possible is NOT scary. This has been possible for years and will go one being possible. Why am I not afraid? Simple: the overwhelming majority of people on Earth are not killers, terrorists or psychopaths. The overwhelming majority of people in airports are just trying to travel, just like you. And if you happen to have the bad luck of ending up on a plane or in a terminal at the same time as a killer, terrorist or a psychopath, take stock in knowing that it was just random bad luck.

Or, if you swung by Evan Booth's website, you may have already learned how to arm yourself against the insanely unlikely event of being on a plane or in a terminal at the same time as a mean person. That's ultimately my point. All these security measures at airports (taking off our shoes, x-raying our bags/coats/laptops etc, backscatter x-raying our bodies and sometimes getting felt up by a TSA agent) are not going to stop someone who really wants to hurt people.

The likelihood of getting hit by a car, even killed by one, is infinitely higher than of getting killed, or even harmed, in an air-travel-related act of violence. But do we ban cars, stop ourselves from crossing the street, or avoid leaving our homes? Of course not. Yet we act like we can stop someone if they really want to be horrible at the airport.

But the odds are in our favor. So, why bother living in fear? Why bother making air travel such a huge pain in the ass? Sure, keep x-raying bags and making me empty my pockets, but can I please keep my shoes on and my water bottle filled?

Read the original post on io9: http://goo.gl/4CHNg0

From last month: Engadget reports on USG/UKG tapping Google and Yahoo & spying on a ton of users. Serious #BigBrother stuff.

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/hyfHt6SriT/

From the Engadget post:

It's a top secret plan with a fittingly supervillain-esque codename: MUSCULAR. That tool, part of a partnership between the NSA and the UK's GCHQ, has been used to infiltrate Google and Yahoo data centers across the world, according to documents revealed by Edward Snowden and confirmed by sources at The Washington Post. It's a breach of privacy that could affect hundreds of millions of users, one that neither company was apparently privy to, in spite of the NSA's history of court-ordered data access with both.

The original post: http://goo.gl/oQmfLX

So, while our planet is being stripped of its resources, our government is stripping us of much of our privacy and, as a result, our freedom of speech. I feel like they know something we don't. Like maybe the world is only going to get worse and they need to clamp down on us to keep us in line, so they can stay in power. When governments feel threatened, this is what they do.

@NYTimes reports on how USG and UKG spies infiltrated #WorldOfWarcraft and #SecondLife. #ThisIsGettingRidiculous

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/hvsjxLyro9/

From the original article:

Fearing that terrorist or criminal networks could use the games to communicate secretly, move money or plot attacks, the documents show, intelligence operatives have entered terrain populated by digital avatars that include elves, gnomes and supermodels.

This is the most ridiculous rationalization for spying ever. What about Xbox and Playstation's networked games? What about the ALL the various chat/instant messaging networks out there, like Line, Kik and Snapchat? What about all the social networks that could be used by bad people? There are damn near infinite ways to communicate in the world today. Does the USG want to tap them all?

Our tax dollars at work.

And don't forget--the vaaaast majority of WoW players and Second Life users are NOT terrorists (not to mention those of us who have had our online and phone data swept up, as well). However, now, we are all now potential suspects.

My buddy @JayThePal on the NSA spying stuff

http://youtu.be/zFGMu93DhiI

I am in complete agreeance.

TechDirt.com reports on how Lavabit founder may end up arrested for shutting down his service.

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/dPltN6yri5/

OK, this is really starting to get creepy now. The USG may arrest a guy for closing down his business? A business he shut down because he didn't want to comply with a request by the USG he felt was wrong?

America: Land of the (not) free!

If you haven't already seen it, check out the interview That the founder of Lavabit did on Democracy Now: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/8/13/exclusive_owner_of_snowdens_email_service

My favorite bit was when he is asked if he recieved a National Security Letter from the USG and he explained that he wasn't allowed to say.

AMERICA

NYTimes interviews the founder of LavaBit.com and explains why he committed business suicide.

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/c9aRc7yrnm/

From the article:

“I’ve always sort of believed it’s important for Americans to have private conversations with other Americans,” Mr. Levison said in a telephone interview Monday, “and not fear that their conversations were being monitored by the government.”

More:

Lavabit’s mysterious legal drama began six weeks ago. One of its more than 400,000 users was Edward J. Snowden, the leaker who had worked as a National Security Agency contractor. Mr. Levison has not said whether or what kind of government order he was served with, or how it might have been served.

His lawyer, Jesse Binnall, made it clear that Lavabit had complied with “narrowly tailored” court orders for user information on at least two dozen occasions in the past.

Mr. Levison, now 32 and living in Dallas, added: “What I’m opposed to are blanket court orders granting government access to everything.

Read the whole interview: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/lavabit-founder-says-he-had-obligation-to-shut-service/

More scary stuff from the surveillance state. Or should I say the police state? This is what a police state looks like. We're still a Police State Lite, but the fact that the USG feels the need to collect data on all of us means that we're all potential criminals, which is, by definition I believe, a police state.

Luckily, no one is getting arrested for what they say or write, that we know of. In a country where the government lies and obfuscates to it's people and the country's news media largely plays along, how can we know for sure that it won't come to that, or isn't there already?

TheAtlantic.com: big Internet companies are being commandeered by the USG.

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/c9UvbSyrug/

From the opinion piece:

We're already starting to see that. Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and others are pleading with the government to allow them to explain details of what information they provided in response to National Security Letters and other government demands. They've lost the trust of their customers, and explaining what they do -- and don't do -- is how to get it back. The government has refused; they don't care.

Read the whole piece: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/08/the-nsa-is-commandeering-the-internet/278572/

This is seriously scary stuff and is right on the money. Corporations and the USG are beholden to each other in a way us normal civilians once were but can now never be. We don't have the money to be important enough to the USG. The USG is too corrupt and, by definition, corporations are only in it for the money, so... we're screwed.

I feel strongly that we need an Independent Internet--a network of devices that link together and don't necesarily rely on a mega-corporation to provide a "backbone" of hardware or of services. I think it's well within the abilities of technology available to us to create a new Internet that could function outside of the control of both corporations AND the USG or any government for that matter.

NYTimes reports on FISA Court giving the NSA even more power to amass private data related to non-terror cases. Did the USG start a new war and not tell us?

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/beGCb5SrjR/

From the article:

In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation’s surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.

The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long, reveal that the court has taken on a much more expansive role by regularly assessing broad constitutional questions and establishing important judicial precedents, with almost no public scrutiny, according to current and former officials familiar with the court’s classified decisions.

The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.

I mean, seriously, did the USG start a war and not tell us? What is all this data for? Last time I checked, the vast majority of us are not invovled in nuclear proliferation or cyberterrorism. I also don't remember the Fourth Amendment being suspended. Soooo... WTF, USG? Why so serious?

NYTimes.com reports on the USPS photographing the outside of every piece of paper mail sent in the US. You know, so they can track who you've communicated with. Happy #4thofjuly!

From the article:

As the world focuses on the high-tech spying of the National Security Agency, the misplaced card offers a rare glimpse inside the seemingly low-tech but prevalent snooping of the United States Postal Service.

Mr. Pickering was targeted by a longtime surveillance system called mail covers, a forerunner of a vastly more expansive effort, the Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program, in which Postal Service computers photograph the exterior of every piece of paper mail that is processed in the United States — about 160 billion pieces last year. It is not known how long the government saves the images.

Why does the USG need to know so much about us? They're snoping on our email AND our snail mail.

If this were really the land of the free this kind of surveillance would not be going on.

Happy 4th of July, everyone! >_<

Senate passes bill that removes the most basic human right AND reminds us: only Americans are human.

Senate passes bill that removes the most basic human right AND reminds us: only Americans are human., a photo by thepetecom on Flickr.

Capped this last night (source: bit.ly/tRP0Vr):

"The Senate on Thursday passed a giant defense bill that includes a new policy for detaining and trying suspected al Qaeda terrorists"

That was CNN's simple explanation of the bill, but if you continue to read a few paragraphs in you get to see, not only how the US Senate is pissing the US Constitution down their leg, but also how the media is still just repeating what they are told and not actually doing any challenging of our leaders. Hell, they don't even question things in the article where no politician can directly challenge them back--but I'm getting ahead of myself. Here's a cutting from the article that shows us how the US Senate agrees that if you're not American, you're not human:

"This country is special because we have certain values, and due process of law is one of those values," Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-California, argued on the Senate floor.  "I object to holding American citizens without trial. I do not believe that makes us more safe."

Pretty neat, huh? Feinstein, a Democrat, does not object to holding non-Americans without trial despite our founding documents declaring that all humans are created equal. I guess Senator Feinstein believes that if you're not American you're not human. Why else shouldn't all people have the right to be free from unlawful imprisonment?

More from the article:

"You have people on the left who hate saying 'the war on terror,'" responded Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina. "They would never ever use the military and always insist the law enforcement be used because they don't buy into the idea that we're at war. They want to criminalize the war."

HA! The phrase "criminalize the war" is laughingly nonsensical enough but the straw-man argument Graham spins is laughably typical. As though the legal system is somehow inadequate for keeping Americans safe. Apparently, the FBI and the cops and the judicial system sucks so much ass, America would fall apart if it was trusted with going after terrorists. No, WE NEED A WAR!

It's politicians like Feinstein and Graham that totally miss the point of OUR FOUNDING PRINCIPLES and make me want to give up on "America" as a concept. I mean, seriously--what the ability to hold anyone indefinitely does is remove the first human right (essentially) ever established: the right of Habeas Corpus. Going back as far as the 1300s, Habeas Corpus is the right that everyone needs guaranteed because it allows a prisoner to challenge their detention. And EVERYONE needs this right, not just Americans--why? Because of mistakes.

Let's say Diane Feinstein or Lindsey Graham were mistaken for Canadians who inadvertently supported a pro-Palestinian terrorist group. How would they be able to challenge their detention?

Read more about Habeas Corpus on Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus

Read the rest of the CNN article to see how wonderful a job they do of contextualizing this bill in a way that allows you to see how unConstitutional it is: bit.ly/tRP0Vr OH WAIT, they don't do that at all, instead, completely ignoring it's obvious conflicts with our founding documents.

Just a quick reminder: 1 in 2 adult men will get cancer. The craziest, most extreme Al Qaeda guy only wishes he was that effective. How about a War on Cancer, Senators Graham and Feinstein, hmmm? I'm totally down with indefinite detention of cancer tumors, in fact, let's kill them on sight.

Just a reminder: The USG likes to trump up Terrorist threats, like that last one.

I spotted this tweet two weeks ago and opened it in a tab but then forgot to blog about it. Basically, it’s proof, once again, that the USG doesn’t like to bother with actual terrorists. Instead preferring to pretend people with intent but without means deserve to be arrested for wrongthinking and being stupid enough to trust an FBI plant who is pretending to be someone he isn’t.  So, here’s the tweet:

From @BreakingNews: “More: US officials say their assessment of some Iranian leaders’ plot knowledge is based on history, analysis, not hard evidence - @Reuters”

Original tweet is here.

See, evidence is that thing you need to convict another human of a crime since all humans are guaranteed certain rights regardless of nationality, gender, religion or sexual preference.  At least, I thought that was the case before American citizen Al-Awlaki got blown up by a drone.  So apparently, you don’t need a court OR evidence to decide someone is a terrorist.

Read more about the case the tweet refers to in a post on my blog.

Yet another supposed "terrorist plot" has been "foiled."

One thing I've noticed about the various terrorist plots foiled by the USG is that they've all involved undercover USG-types posing as Al Qaeda or someone else.  When those dudes in Florida wanted to blow up the Sears Tower, they were to get everything from weapons to boots (BOOTS!) from their Al Qaeda guy.  Their Al Qaeda guy was actually FBI.  Turns out they had zero means to do what they wanted to do.

Likewise, that kid who wanted to leave a bomb at a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Oregon (I think) a year or two ago--he was a kid who was dealing with, who he thought was an Al Qaeda guy, but was actually an FBI guy.  This was a kid who had no means to commit his act of terror.

And again, recently with this supposed Iranian plot.  Check out what Reuters reported:

U.S. court documents accuse Arbabsiar, a naturalized U.S. citizen with an Iranian passport, of paying $100,000 to an informant, who had posed as an associate of a Mexican drug cartel but in fact worked for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency and alerted the authorities to the plot.

Now, there aren't enough specifics here to say it's essentially a case of entrapment (like we can say about the previous two examples), but if the USG is sticking to form, we can certainly consider it a strong possibility until we know for sure.  But seriously, we really shouldn't be surprised if suddenly this story drops out of the media entirely in a few days like those previous stories I mentioned.

It's just another example of this trumped up (non-)war on terror.

My Take on the latest Facebook Mess (The one where it tracks you even if you're logged out)

I posted a variant of this post earlier on Website666.com. Check it out if you want more context, but my commentary is more meaty here.

So, even if you log out, Facebook can still track you through the magic of cookies--those little "bread crumbs" that websites leave on your computer with info about your behavior on that site or other sites.

Well, this doesn't surprise me too much.  After all, every one of us should be aware that we're not Facebook's customers. Facebook's customers are advertisers.  We are Soylent Green fed to the advertisers--aka, what advertisers pay Facebook for is made of people. Our eyes, our traffic, our behavior patterns are what Facebook customers pay for.  This is how big brother really works.  It follows you where ever you go and knows whatever you do (online).  But it's not government watching your every move, trying to control you and manipulate you, it's big business.

If you don't mind having your every move tracked and exploited by Facebook, they'll be happy to provide you with a place to connect with friends and family and a place to post links, pictures and video that you can share with said friends and family and play really stupid, time-wasting games.

I hate to sound jaded, but I don't know if Facebook being all KGB on our asses is that big of a deal.  I mean, so what? We're being exploited.  So?  I mean, it's lame we don't get a bigger piece of Zuckerdouche's financial pie (we just get the services Facebook offers, which are easily found elsewhere), but in the end, what are we losing?

I'm not saying we're not losing anything, it's just that I'm honestly not sure what it is.

I know I don't like the feeling of being exploited, but capitalism already does that to us.  When we buy a $3 cup of coffee at Starbucks, we're not just paying a mark-up, we're paying a HUGE mark-up that has allowed Starbucks to expand around the world and its executives to get very rich.  I don't blame vendors for mark-ups to cover costs and salaries, but Starbucks (and many other companies) don't charge what they need to, they charge MUCH more.  How do you think Apple ended up with so much cash laying around?  Because they only charged you for what that iPhone in your pocket cost to make?  Hell no.

We're all being exploited every day.  Personally, I don't like it.  But what can I do? Capitalism is everywhere.

Ha! I almost typed "capitulationism" just then.  Well, I guess that sort of fits. :

Speaking of business, buy my book, wouldja? Thanks!

Live in the UK? Becareful where you point that camera! It might be against the law.

OK, so, ages ago, I had heard on DemocracyNow that the UK had made it illegal to photograph police officers. I mentioned this to a couple of British friends and they denied it, certain it wasn’t true.  Well, thanks to a tweet from a different “the Pete”, I am now aware that it is effectively illegal to photograph a police officer or, really, anything in public.

The following comes from a FAQ at askthe.police.uk:

It is not illegal to take photographs or video footage in public places unless it is for criminal or terrorist purposes.

Uh-huh. Don’t be so sure. After they explain the civil ramifications of taking photos of individuals (you are open to a lawsuit) check out what else they say:

…it is a specific offence to elicit information (which would include photographs) about members of armed forces, police officers or the intelligence services, which is likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or publishes or communicates information of that kind. The law does not state that the person who gets the information has to use the information for terrorism purposes, just that the information is likely to be useful to a terrorist.

I’ve emboldened the shocking bits.  That keeps things pretty free for the cops to arrest pretty much whomever they damn well please, doesn’t it?  As an American, I already know that cops can trump up anything in order to arrest you—I’ve been harassed by cops on many occasions just because they decided I looked suspicious. But to see it codified in this way is scary.  BUT, predictably enough, there’s MORE:

Photographers need to be aware of this provision and be cautious when taking such photographs. The sort of occasion when it could cause a problem may be, for example, at an anti-war protest, when there may be a number of counter terrorism and intelligence operatives working in the area.

Why would there be “counter terrorism and intelligence operatives” working in the area of an anti-war protest?!?! Does the UKG not understand the concept of “ANTI-war”?? I’d like to make a pithy comment about how this is no surprise coming from the “land of George Orwell’s birth” here, but I’ve seen American cops make the same illogical leap. 

It’s truly absurd for the UKG or any other government to think they can (or should) prevent intelligence from getting to terrorists.  Stopping people from taking pictures in public places in this way is quite literally an example of how the UK has become a subtle police state.  How any Brit can consider themselves “free” but live in fear of being arrested simply because they happened to take a snapshot at the wrong time of the wrong person is beyond me.

I have a hard enough time feeling “free” in my own country for similar reasons and I live in the alleged land OF the free!

What is going on with this world?

Internet user arrested for linking to other websites

Internet user arrested for linking to other websites

This is thanks to a Clinton Era law, by the way:

Brian McCarthy ran a website, channelsurfing.net, that linked to various sites where you could watch online streams of TV shows and sports networks.

From Demand Progress:

A couple months ago, the government seized his domain name and on Friday they arrested him and charged him with criminal copyright infringement — punishable by five years in prison.

It’s against the law to link to sites that allow circumvention of digital copyright protection.  Yep—that’s the equivalent to linking to a website that teaches you how to pick locks.  It’s called the DMCA.

Big (Corporate) Brother: Wireless carriers openly considering charging per service -- Engadget

Big (Corporate) Brother: Wireless carriers openly considering charging per service -- Engadget

thetechpete:

Imagine paying extra to visit Facebook. Imagine not being able to check your tweets with your smartphone while on the go.  Imagine wireless carriers charging us to do even more stuff that costs them little extra to do (like they already do with texting).  This is horrible and they’re thinking about considering it.

I remember back in the AOL days when AOL used to charge X amount of dollars for X amount of hours online. Ridiculous, right? Of course. Well, it seems like wireless carriers may be thinking about going backwards. In fact, in some ways, they already have with their $60/mo-for-1GB-style plans. Now they want to micromanage what they let us do on their connections.

This is ridiculous.  Please clock the link above and read more about this nightmarish scenario.

Posted this on my tech blog and thought that posting it here, too, would be a no-brainer. 

EFFYOU.ORG: EFFYOU to alleged terrorism fighters who don't go after ACTUAL terrorists.

EFFYOU.ORG: EFFYOU to alleged terrorism fighters who don't go after ACTUAL terrorists.

effyouorg:

All of the folks out there that are going after Al Qaeda or other extremist-types with the actual means to cause physical harm, GOOD ON YOU!  Keep up the good work!!  All the other folks out there who go after pissed off kids and other losers who have precisely zero means to commit the acts they say they want to commit: EFF YOU.

Among the principles the United States was founded on, none of them encourages or condones the arrest of people who would LIKE to harm others but can’t actually do it.  In fact, one of the most basic concepts behind our country is the idea that every human is entitled to freedom of thought.

What happens when you find a 21 year-old guy or a 19 year-old kid who are pissed off at the government and dream of killing people?

Nothing.

Well…

Read the rest at http://effyou.org

The USG trumps up threat then tells us how they're protecting us from it.

This is something I’ve noticed the USG and the FBI doing for a while.  See if you can notice what’s wrong with the following cutting from a November 28, 2010 article at LATimes.com reporting on a 19 year-old naturalized American (originally from Somalia) who wanted to blow up a bunch of Americans (I’ll add italics to make it obvious):

“The threat was very real,” said Arthur Balizan, special agent in charge of the FBI in Oregon. “Our investigation shows that Mohamud was absolutely committed to carrying out an attack on a very grand scale.”

According to the FBI, they arrested Mohamud after he dialed a cellphone that he thought would detonate a huge bomb — six 55-gallon drums, diesel fuel and a large box of screws — in a large white van parked near the tree lighting.

But the bomb was a fake built by the FBI, and the packed crowds who enjoyed a youth choir and a symphony orchestra at Friday’s holiday celebration at Pioneer Courthouse Square were never in danger, authorities said.

Let me break this down for you:

The FBI finds this teenager who’s pissed at the USG, builds a pretend bomb for him, hands him the detonator and then arrests him when he activates it.

Where’s the crime there, exactly?

I mean, sure, he’s “wrongthinking” like in the Orwell novel, 1984, but wrongthinking isn’t illegal (yet). 

On top of that, this guy had no obvious means to make a bomb to kill anyone on his own.  He’s a kid.  I remember how moody and obnoxious I was when I was 19! (If you think I’m bad now!) 

Why is it that we only hear about these toothless tigers and not actual threats being foiled by the FBI?  Hell, the Times Square Bomber from earlier this year failed in his attempt to blow up a bomb only because he was a complete and utter fucktard.  The FBI didn’t catch him beforehand and nearly lost him as he tried to flee the country. 

Seems the FBI can only catch a terrorist if they arm him and supply him first. It’s like a literal version of the “Straw Man Argument” where you, effectively, make a false statement and then prove it wrong to show how cool you are.  This time, they prop up this kid as a terrorist and then brag about it when they take him down.

There’s something deeply wrong about this.