Now stop and think about this. How can I possibly, possibly confirm that this guy, who I have indeed corresponded with via email, actually is who he says he is? We all now know for a metaphysical certitude that all of our email has been logged and may have been read by FEDGOV. We MUST assume that FEDGOV is every bit as knowledgable of our data and correspondences as we are. How do I know that this man standing before me really is ‘Disturbed Citizen’? There is no possible way for me to confirm this. I don’t know what ‘Disturbed Citizen’s’ name is, so asking for an I.D. is pointless. I don’t know what ‘Disturbed Citizen’ looks like, so visual confirmation is off the table. And the enemy has FULL ACCESS to all correspondence between myself and the real ‘Disturbed Citizen’, and thus can quote and make references WITH FULL CONTEXT AND DETAIL.RTWT. The way you lose is by fighting the last war...
Do you see this? Given the tactical situation, the proper course is NOT for us to hide. That ship sailed a LONG time ago. The only thing that hiding behind aliases, handles and noms de guerre accomplishes is opening a HUGE door to the enemy such that they can infiltrate us with ease never-before-seen in the annals of war. The proper tactic is to BE NOT AFRAID and come out from behind aliases and handles NOW.
Now, take me, for example. If I were to roll into some event somewhere, people would know who I was by name and by sight, and if they did not know who I was, I could quickly and easily confirm my identity and bona fides.
21 August 2013
Inversion of the tactical table
Folks, she's making some points you ought to read and think about.