131217

Posted Tuesday 17th December 2013 04:18 GMT amanfromMars 1 ….. pouring petrol onto the fires a’burning on http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2013/12/16/bruce_schneier_leaves_bt/

Tomorrows always bring something else to tempt and discourage you from thinking too much

BT and GCHQ are joined at the hip with the latter unable to even try to function secretly and efficiently without the compliance and conspiring of the former in the best stealthy interests of …. well, they probably like y’all to not think too deeply when in IT and it be country, but you need to morph that thought into something personal with human faces on it, for such dumb ass myopic patriotic nationalism is that which blinds y’all to vast personal fortunes able to be readily made at great public expense and future general population indebtedness to …… well, y’all tell me what mad phantom has you all fired up and ready to go and do anything and everything. There’s some real crazy clever folk into communicating with man and machines out there, and they have your sad and sorry asses in a sling and your life in their hands, hearts and minds to play with, and your ignorance is making it with IT, so easy for them. Although hanging on to Future IT Command and Control with Media Mogul Support is one of those Enigmatic MetaDataBase Problems which Defy and Deny Stupid Solution with Risky Resolutions.

So why would such a valuable security voice like what Bruce Schneier apparently supposedly is according to his fans, be walking the long lonely walk down the road and kicking stones rather than leading with thoughts that build commands that control the future with telecommunicating giants?

Are you telling me that BT and GCHQ can’t handle a little speculative flack ack ack/primed sub-prime comment from one of their own camping within the puzzle palace gates, without drawing any/so much attention to themselves.

Wow, if that be the case they both need new leading lights to show them the new directions they need to be taking, and tout de fcuking suite, mate. Check.

And yes, I do read Bruce’s blog but have never imagined the words shared there be capable of ensuring and insuring and assuring others it be of secure futurologistic leading thought.

So, the earlier post stands in all of its undoubted ugliness and brutal truth and probable virtual reality.

And is ”Hi, mhoneywell, Is that you, Bruce?” idiotic sarcasm for those who would recognise fools in the gallery?

P.S. How very wise of you methinks, uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh494 [who posted Monday 16th December 2013 18:23 GMT] to have hedged all of those bets, for idiots would surely have no desire for anything El Reg spends time and resources on sourcing and reporting and even less interest in providing commentary on it and IT too.

.............................................................................