As the Missouri National Guard prepared to deploy to help quell riots in Ferguson, Missouri, that raged sporadically last year, the guard used highly militarized words such as “enemy forces” and “adversaries” to refer to protesters, according to documents obtained by CNN.

The guard came to Ferguson to support law enforcement officers, whom many community leaders and civil rights activists accused of using excessive force and inflaming an already tense situation in protests that flared sporadically from August through the end of the year.

“It’s disturbing when you have what amounts to American soldiers viewing American citizens somehow as the enemy,” said Antonio French, an alderman in St. Louis.

I want to study hard. To be a master of my trade. To have a good job, and a great career. Security.

I want to go. To not be tied down by materials and commitments. To know new places and people. Freedom.

Who has the most to fear from C-51? Canadian Muslims.

Just over a month ago, Canadian citizen Benamar Benatta quietly settled his lawsuit against the federal government over the unlawful treatment he suffered in the days immediately after 9/11.

Benatta, an Algerian, spent five years in American prisons because Canadian border officials at Fort Erie, Ont., turned him over to U.S. officials for investigation after he showed up at the border crossing and said he wished to claim refugee status. It took him years to clear his name.

“Canada is a great country but, unfortunately, there are many examples where Canadian officials have dispensed with human rights in the name of national security,” Mr. Benatta said after his lawsuit was settled.

“People need to understand a terrible injustice was done to me. I was labelled a terrorist because I happened to be Muslim … That is racial profiling at its worst. These Canadian officials ruined my life without a second thought, and that is really hard to bear.”

Continue Reading.

Why some Americans have not changed their privacy and security behaviors

Why haven’t most Americans taken a more aggressive approach to protecting their digital data in the wake a string of revelations about domestic and international surveillance efforts? When we asked respondents to tell us in their own words, several possible – and sometimes overlapping – reasons emerged:

I have nothing to hide

“I have not changed anything, I feel confident that I am an honest person with nothing to hide.”

“I have not [made changes]. My life, sorry to say, just isn’t that interesting.”

I do not have the time or expertise

“I do not feel expert enough to know what to do to protect myself, and to know that the protection chosen is effective. Technology changes very fast.”

“Don’t know about a lot about computers.”

It won’t prevent monitoring anyway

“I don’t think it will make much of a difference.”

“It doesn’t hurt to try to keep the government out of everything but they have the resources to get past everything anyway …”

I don’t want to raise suspicions or invite scrutiny

“I didn’t significantly change anything. It’s more like trying to avoid anything questionable, so as not to be scrutinized unnecessarily.”

“I have no *need* for anything further. At some point ‘attempting’ to protect your own privacy will be seen as having a ‘need’ to hide something, and thus inviting further violations.”

I am comfortable with the monitoring because it makes us safer

“Small price to pay for maintaining our safe environment from terrorist activities.”

“Some monitoring is required to keep Americans safe. The government is just going to review and delete information on boring people like me.”

What about you? Have you changed your digital behaviors since Edward Snowden’s revelations?


The really scary thing is that this is possible tomorrow. As technology continues to envelope our lives soon the very sky will no linger be free.