Well it does, but the important, unavoidable pollution is because it allows more oil and gas to be extracted, producing more CO2 and causing climate change. Localised pollution is largely avoidable or (like fracking-induced earthquakes) likely to be imaginary.
However, people are a bit thick, so it’s easier to scare them with “toxic shit in the water supply that gives you spots and makes the crockery fall over” than with the steady and deleterious modification of the climate.
The trouble is, self-entitled rednecks are one species of introduced mammal that's protected in NZ, at least by a lot of the cops who are meant to keep them under control. It's questionable how effectively they'll pursue any leads they come across.
(See also the Atiamuri stop-go man murder, unsolved after two years. Not to mention Allan Titford).
And the spooks aren't interested - helping on this won't get them any brownie points in Washington or Cheltenham, right?
In a place where there was an actual terrorist/insurgency campaign going on, like 80's Northern Ireland or Iraq today, you could reasonably feed such a system with (historical) collected intelligence and use actual incidents as "training data".
When the number of incidents tends to zero, that process becomes a lot less useful.
(Mind you, all intelligence is often less than useful in predicting one's opponents actions. See John Keegan, Intelligence in War - even the level of knowledge available through Ultra didn't help most WW2 generals, with the exception of the Atlantic anti-submarine campaign, where the Germans were following repeated similar tactics using central C3, which the Allies had of course substantial visibility into).
Well poisoning is a crime which requires an intent to cause harm, but maybe a reckless disregard for evidence that a quack remedy is harmful could amount to intent?
Also, consider this:
- we have a situation where there has been no organised islamic terrorist actions in NZ, and very few anywhere in the West for over ten years.
- human intelligence activity, or just old fashioned community policing is likely to verify that there are no organised terrorist groups operating here.
- signals intelligence analysed through data mining can provide a different story, largely because a data analysis system can produce any result its owner wants (provided one doesn't care to check it for correlation with reality). It's possible to regard access to jihadi websites, money transfers to muslim states, foreign travel, facebook chatter and the like as being quantative indications of terrorist conspiracy.
- thus the use of signals "intelligence" is an ideal way to promote the concept that there is a real and organised terrorist threat
The cellular structure is very difficult to penetrate
Especially when the cell consists of one person and their inner voices.
I think what they're on about is that back in the day, if they wanted to tap someone's phone they'd get a warrant, go along to the telephone exchange and plug some wires in.
Now they're arguing that its too hard to go to each internet company with a warrant to read email, and it's easier to just store everyone's communications in a big database in the US and read what they need.
(Bear in mind here that the GCSB has 300 staff to process only 53 warrants - so they claim).
I guess if rugby's boring here, it must be even more dull in all the other countries who can never beat us.
The main thing that keeps it going in England is that it's the sport of choice for posh people who wouldn't descend to attending a soccer game. Even there, with season ticket prices in the $5k range the chances of a prole-free stadium are on the rise.
I wonder if that's G T Dick of 34 Miro St, Masterton.
Maybe someone could put a webcam in that nice tree outside, or have a quick squiz on their mate's friend's work database?
the manufacture and supply of illicit drugs is by definition a crime
If you were a traditional Muslim, you could say the same of the manufacture of alcoholic drinks, or bacon. But Saudi Arabia and Iran don’t get to dictate our laws on that, in fact, aren’t we sending the army to shoot a few people in the head to make just that point?
Manufacturing and supplying cannabis isn't criminal in one country and four US states. Why should other countries (and similarly, the US federal government) impose their will on those places, any more than muslim countries get to impose their alcohol laws elsewhere?