An interesting piece of information from the Wikileaks diplomatic cables (not really news, because most people already inferred it to be true — but now it’s confirmed) is that Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have strongly encouraged a US attack on Iran to stop its nuclear program.
1 |
laZardo Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:37:30am |
Iran, of course, denies it... but they'd rather not be seen worrying in public.
| 3 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:42:34am |
Iran is of course blaming the US and Israel for taking out one of Iran's top nuclear scientists and injuring another in coordinated bomb attacks. The wikileaks memos show that far from being alone in their desire to stop Iran, the US and Israel are joined by pretty much everyone else in the Middle East in trying to stop Iran's nuclear program.
That makes it both easier and more difficult to deal with Iran. Some of those ME regimes don't want to openly cooperate with the US because of domestic opposition to the US (and/or Israel) but recognize Iran's threat to regional stability. So, while now more of this is out in the open, it reduces the operating space for those regimes to work in concert with the US to stop Iran's nuclear program.
In short, this complicates matters greatly.
| 4 |
Political Atheist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:44:02am |
Ah yes the other strategic reason for Iran to have nukes. 90% of the Muslim world considers them doctrinal heathens. For all the posturing about Israel, it's really about being in the minority of a religion that has a violent history with doctrinal dissent.
| 5 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:44:15am |
This should come as no surprise, to anyone.
Israel has never been the real problem in the region. Even without her, does anyone really believe that Iran and the other dysfunctional regimes in the Middle East will somehow become responsible and examples of enlightened, civilized nations?
Israel has a real retaliatory capability. Arab regimes do not.
That is something the mullahs in Tehran and the Arab regimes are well aware of.
Factor in the centuries old Shia obsession with controlling Mecca and being top dog in the region, Arab fears are well justified.
| 6 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:47:19am |
re: #3 lawhawk
Iran is of course blaming the US and Israel for taking out one of Iran's top nuclear scientists and injuring another in coordinated bomb attacks. The wikileaks memos show that far from being alone in their desire to stop Iran, the US and Israel are joined by pretty much everyone else in the Middle East in trying to stop Iran's nuclear program.
That makes it both easier and more difficult to deal with Iran. Some of those ME regimes don't want to openly cooperate with the US because of domestic opposition to the US (and/or Israel) but recognize Iran's threat to regional stability. So, while now more of this is out in the open, it reduces the operating space for those regimes to work in concert with the US to stop Iran's nuclear program.
In short, this complicates matters greatly.
Yes. The revelations of a close relationship with the US (and probably Israel as well. Recall the story of Israeli helicopters moved and stored in KSA) will not sit well with many more fundamentalist groups throughout the Arab world.
| 7 |
Randall Gross Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:49:45am |
At the same time you have the new chair of the Homeland security committee, Peter King demagogueing by trying to get Wikileaks designated as a terror group... wotta dip.
| 8 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:51:27am |
Now, we know from this document dump that the Arab regimes were just as interested in stopping Iran in private as Israel has been in public. It confirms what most people were saying for a good long time (myself included) about the sectarian and political divide that puts Iran (and Syria and their proxies Hamas and Hizbullah on one side) and the rest of the ME on the other - with Turkey and SA attempting to play kingmaker/intermediary, while Israel is the lone wolf who is out to protect itself from all sides but has repeatedly shown itself capable of dealing with regimes on both sides of the Sunni/Shia schism to further Israel's own interests (worked with the Shah of Iran, joint military efforts with Turkey, peace deal with Egypt and Jordan for example).
Still, these documents echo the public/private sentiments after the Israeli attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981. The Arab regimes were privately quite relieved at Israel doing the dirty work for them, but publicly angry because they had to deal with the diplomatic angles as they usually did - where anything Israel did was necessarily evil.
| 9 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:52:11am |
The Dagestani wedding at which Kadyrov was a guest:
[Link: cablegate.wikileaks.org...]
| 10 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 8:54:55am |
re: #9 Sergey Romanov
Another group of Gadzhi’s boyhood friends from
Khasavyurt was led by a man who looked like Shamil Basayev on
his day off -- flip-flops, t-shirt, baseball cap, beard --
but turned out to be the chief rabbi of Stavropol Kray. He
told us he has 12,000 co-religionists in the province, 8,000
of them in its capital, Pyatigorsk. 70 percent are, like
him, Persian-speaking Mountain Jews; the rest are a mixture
of Europeans, Georgians and Bukharans.
| 11 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:08:30am |
This should be a wake up call for those who think that Israel is what destabilizes the Middle East, to recognize that what destabilizes the Middle East is the corrupt, assholic governments in charge of every country but Israel in the Middle East.
| 12 |
nines09 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:09:06am |
Saudi foreign policy at it's best. Play both ends against the middle, cover the over and under and have someone else be the bad guy. Then of course, oil goes through the roof and they cash in.
| 13 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:10:20am |
re: #11 Obdicut
This should be a wake up call for those who think that Israel is what destabilizes the Middle East, to recognize that what destabilizes the Middle East is the corrupt, assholic governments in charge of every country but Israel in the Middle East.
No truer words.
| 14 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:12:07am |
obdicut:
Can we start a whisper campaign to get "assholic" included in the next Oxford dictionary. It just rolls off the tongue? I love it!
| 15 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:13:23am |
Avigdor Lieberman's visit to Moscow:
[Link: cablegate.wikileaks.org...]
The trip included meetings
with Medvedev and Putin, as well as a lengthy discussion with
FM Lavrov, during which Lieberman indicated that Israel was
not considering a military strike on Iran.[...]
The FMs discussed expanding
bilateral economic ties, and Lavrov raised Russian concern
that Israel was partaking in "historical revisionism" that
sought to blame Russia for the Ukrainian famine of the 1930s.[...]
He reiterated that Russia did not believe
there existed hard evidence that Iran's nuclear program had a
military dimension, and thought it transparent enough to
detect whether resources were directed to military uses.[...]
¶13. (C) Lavrov raised Russian concern with "historical
revisionism" regarding the Soviet Era and Second World War,
which, he said, was particularly acute in Eastern Europe but
was also present in Israel. He cited Israel's official
recognition of the Holodomor, the 1930s famine that occurred
in Ukraine. Lieberman explained that by recognizing this
tragedy, Israel had not said Russia was guilty of causing it,
nor that it was an act of genocide.
| 16 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:15:37am |
MEDVEDEV, PUTIN, AND RUSSIA'S IRAN POLICY
[Link: cablegate.wikileaks.org...]
| 17 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:18:27am |
MOSCOW'S INCREASING FRUSTRATION WITH TEHRAN
[Link: cablegate.wikileaks.org...]
¶1. (C) Summary: Official GOR reports and media have
pronounced the Russian-Iranian relationship healthy and
Minister of Energy's Shmatko's recent visit to Tehran as a
success. Privately, GOR officials and Russian analysts agree
that there are serious tensions in the bilateral relationship
such as the S-300s issue, the Bushehr project and the
possibility of Russia's support of sanctions. They downplay
Moscow's ability to influence Iran, noting competing
interests within Russia that complicate Russian policy
decisions. Iran policy remains a sensitive domestic
question. End Summary
| 18 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:21:47am |
IRAN DOMINATES NETANYAHU'S VISIT TO MOSCOW 2010-02-22 11:11
[Link: cablegate.wikileaks.org...]
¶13. (C) The Israeli side, according to Rosenblit, was
pleasantly surprised at Russia's harsh tone on Iran which had
changed dramatically even since FM Lieberman's visit in
November. "We heard words from them that we've never heard
before," Rosenblit claimed, "and we aren't hearing the same
old arguments." Rosenblit credited this change to the
Iranians themselves, saying that their rejection of the TRR
proposal and their decision to enrich to 20 percent had
toughened Russia's stance on Iran. He remarked that just a
few months ago, there was concern in Israel that Iran would
divide the international community, but Iran's actions have
only served as a unifying factor. "Russia's understanding of
the Iranian nuclear issue is closer to ours than it was a few
months ago."
| 19 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:27:54am |
Saudi Plan for World Domination:
1. Underpants
2. Destabilize the middle east oil producers
3. Profit
| 20 |
Randall Gross Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:28:51am |
The part I found interesting is the Pakistani resistance to removing fuel from their research site at Chashma - it's been at the edge of areas the Taliban and AQ control for years, most don't understand that risk.
| 21 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:28:57am |
Iran blames Israel, West after bombers kill Iranian nuclear scientist
Assailants on motorcycles attached magnetized bombs to the cars of two nuclear scientists as they were driving to work in Tehran on Monday, killing one and wounding the other, Iranian officials said. The president accused Israel and the West of being behind the attacks.
| 22 |
tigger2005 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:33:09am |
re: #21 Killgore Trout
Iran blames Israel, West after bombers kill Iranian nuclear scientist
Sounds like the glamorous kinda spy work. Probably carried out by a sauve, handsome tuxedo'd man and a beautiful woman with an overtly sexual name.
| 23 |
Big Steve Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:34:41am |
I have not followed the wikileaks thing all that closely but help me out.....these were stolen e-mails right? Back when climategate broke, we (myself included) were extremely upset that the emails were stolen and published and out of context looked bad.....sort of the behind the scenes sausage making. Is there a similar sense of unease here about these emails as well? Also it is my understanding while a lot of these emails are State dept, the leak was from the Pentagon. Are we roundly kicking the Pentagon's ass or at least inferring that they are idiots for having such poor electronic protection?
| 24 |
McSpiff Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:35:59am |
From: 09ABUDHABI192, URGENT UAE REQUEST FOR AIR DEFENSE -- FIVE PATRIOT BATTERIES
7. (S/NF) When pressed on what type of event may precipitate an
Israeli attack, the COS thought the delivery of the Russian S-300
system could be the catalyst. The COS stated very flatly that "I
don't trust the Russians, I've never trusted the Russians or the
Iranians."
I don't agree with them being released, but man am I enjoying reading these
| 25 |
Shiplord Kirel Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:40:57am |
If the Saudis think this is such a great idea, why don't they do it themselves. SA has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on armaments in the past 50 years, much of it on warplanes and missiles that are fully capable of hitting Iran.
Royal Saudi Air Force
Note that there are more than 70 F-15S Strike Eagles and the Saudis have asked for 72 more. They also have 80+ Tornado Strike variants, a fleet of tankers, AWACS aircraft, and a fearsome array of missiles.
What are they waiting for?
| 26 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:41:47am |
re: #22 tigger2005
Sounds like the glamorous kinda spy work. Probably carried out by a sauve, handsome tuxedo'd man and a beautiful woman with an overtly sexual name.
No Kippa and a Star of David tattoo?
| 27 |
Vicious Michigan Union Thug Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:44:43am |
re: #25 Shiplord Kirel
If the Saudis think this is such a great idea, why don't they do it themselves. SA has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on armaments in the past 50 years, much of it on warplanes and missiles that are fully capable of hitting Iran.
Royal Saudi Air Force
Note that there are more than 70 F-15S Strike Eagles and the Saudis have asked for 72 more. They also have 80+ Tornado Strike variants, a fleet of tankers, AWACS aircraft, and a fearsome array of missiles.
What are they waiting for?
This is the princes' personal bling fleet. They're not going to get them dirty or damaged by actually using them to, you know, fight and stuff.
| 28 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:45:21am |
re: #26 Killgore Trout
That's not how we roll:
See here.
Okay. I accept the part about the incredibly beautiful women though. And here (fictionalized slightly).
| 29 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:45:51am |
re: #23 Big Steve
I have not followed the wikileaks thing all that closely but help me out...these were stolen e-mails right? Back when climategate broke, we (myself included) were extremely upset that the emails were stolen and published and out of context looked bad...sort of the behind the scenes sausage making. Is there a similar sense of unease here about these emails as well? Also it is my understanding while a lot of these emails are State dept, the leak was from the Pentagon. Are we roundly kicking the Pentagon's ass or at least inferring that they are idiots for having such poor electronic protection?
I had read that there was a PFC Bradley Manning who had access to Top Secret databases who bragged on a hacking site about compressing the files to a thumb drive and providing it to Assuage.
The only thing that doesn't ring true to me is the amount of files he had access to and the fact that someone didn't nab his butt the moment he downloaded them onto a disc or thumbdrive.
I've read everything in blog comments from false flag op. to highly placed covert activity but why insist on an elaborate scheme when ineptitude on the part of a few government database keepers seems to be the best explaination?
| 30 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:46:36am |
re: #23 Big Steve
I have not followed the wikileaks thing all that closely but help me out...these were stolen e-mails right? Back when climategate broke, we (myself included) were extremely upset that the emails were stolen and published and out of context looked bad...sort of the behind the scenes sausage making. Is there a similar sense of unease here about these emails as well? Also it is my understanding while a lot of these emails are State dept, the leak was from the Pentagon. Are we roundly kicking the Pentagon's ass or at least inferring that they are idiots for having such poor electronic protection?
Part of the problem stems for the changes after 9-11 when government agencies started sharing information. These low level communication from the State Dept were also stored on Pentagon computers. A lot of people had access to them and it only take one traitor to make a big mess. We don't really execute people for treason and espionage anymore so the consequences aren't what they used to be. The guy will do some jail time but that's about it.
| 31 |
prairiefire Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:47:32am |
Also: "US says Saudi donors are chief financiers of al Qaeda."[Link: www.rawstory.com...]
| 32 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:51:15am |
I know this isn't news to anyone who has been paying attention but these leaks are filling in the details of a proxy civil war being played out by the Saudis.
I'd say the biggest loser here is the House of Saud who would probably rather the radical Islamists in their midst did not know they were privately so cozy with the USA.
| 33 |
Teh Flowah Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:53:16am |
This is why the leaks are so dangerous. Some things are MEANT to be secretive. Why do we have protections and confidentialities between doctors and patients, psychiatrists and patients, attorneys and clients? Because it encourages openness.
What happens if governments don't feel like they can make their true feelings known, that they consider a nuclear Iran very dangerous and want something done about it? What would have happened in the Cuban Missile Crisis if there weren't back channel deals that allowed both sides to save face and avoid nuclear war?
Christ people, secrecy isn't always bad. Use your goddamn judgment here. Frank and blunt assessments of the capabilities of other world leaders to get shit done is not something to be aired in public. Yay, now Sarkozy has to deal with being an emperor with no clothes. Just fan-fucking-tastic. There's value in things being thought by many people but not being said aloud. Being verbalized or communicated changes the game. And it has here for the worse.
Fuck you wikileaks.
| 34 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:55:12am |
Having Julian Assuage's personal e-mails and instant messages published for the world to see would be interesting. Not that I'd advocate such a grevious breach of privacy mind you...
| 35 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:55:44am |
There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement.
Bradley Manning
He has upheld his oath of office to support the Constitution. It so happens that enlisted men also take an oath to obey the orders of superiors. Officers don’t make that oath, only to the Constitution. But sometimes the oath to the Constitution and oath to superiors are in conflict"
These people are dangerous and should not be allowed to serve in the military.
| 36 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 9:59:54am |
re: #25 Shiplord Kirel
If the Saudis think this is such a great idea, why don't they do it themselves. SA has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on armaments in the past 50 years, much of it on warplanes and missiles that are fully capable of hitting Iran.
Royal Saudi Air Force
Note that there are more than 70 F-15S Strike Eagles and the Saudis have asked for 72 more. They also have 80+ Tornado Strike variants, a fleet of tankers, AWACS aircraft, and a fearsome array of missiles.
What are they waiting for?
Very simply, because it suits the Saudi leadership, as it does the leadership of the other Sunni autocracies in the ME, to sit back and hope Israel does the world's dirty work -- as it did with the Osirak reactor, the Syrian reactor, etc. -- and then direct the ire of their own population (with the help of the useful idiots in the West) at Israel both (a) as part of their own long-term plan to deligitimize and destroy Israel and (b) to continue to deflect their own populations' attention away from the corruption and lack of freedom in their own societies.
| 37 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:00:29am |
What I learned from Rush today.
The leaks came from the State Department, and "The Clintons" run the State Department, and back in the days when real men ran things, Assange would have been mysteriously killed by now which all means...something.
| 38 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:01:09am |
re: #35 Killgore Trout
Where is the reference to the Oathkeepers or Tea Party? I didn't find it in the Wikipedia article you cited.
Its a pretty big jump from pfc with personal issues getting his 15 minutes of fame to Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers."
| 39 |
The Optimist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:02:13am |
Well? When Obama said he would have the most open Government in modern history, he had no idea what would take place.
| 40 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:02:33am |
re: #37 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
What I learned from Rush today.
The leaks came from the State Department, and "The Clintons" run the State Department, and back in the days when real men ran things, Assange would have been mysteriously killed by now which all means...something.
I prefer a world in which miscreants got a speedy, fair, and public trial.
I'm weird like that.
| 41 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:02:48am |
re: #35 Killgore Trout
You're quoting Daniel Ellsberg congratulating Manning over leaking those hundreds of thousands of documents. Ellsberg was responsible for leaking the Pentagon Papers to the NYT (and further subject of prosecutions that wound up in the US Supreme Court).
| 42 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:04:15am |
re: #14 lawhawk
obdicut:
Can we start a whisper campaign to get "assholic" included in the next Oxford dictionary. It just rolls off the tongue? I love it!
One of the best words available:
assholio
ass·hol·i·o
[ass-ho-lee-oh]
- noun
1. A virtuoso display or exhibition of mean, contemptible, and/or stupid attitudes or behavior
2. A person unusually capable of behaving contemptibly
Ex. 1 - His boorish posts to the forum reeked of assholio.
Ex. 2 - His propensity for obnoxious posting identified him as a budding assholio.
--
I first encountered this word circa 1992, used by a person steeped in Pennsylvania Dutch.
| 43 |
Dancing along the light of day Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:06:04am |
And from the Wingnuts...
Dear Mr. Assange,
You seem to be quite good at this. Here's what we want next:
-Obama's original birth certificate
-Obama's school transcripts - primary to Harvard
-records of Obama's meetings with socialists (er, I mean "progressives") prior to his nomination
-the name of the author(s) who actually wrote Obama's books
You gotta admire their persistence//
| 44 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:07:06am |
re: #42 negativ
One of the best words available:
assholio
ass·hol·i·o
[ass-ho-lee-oh]
- noun
1. A virtuoso display or exhibition of mean, contemptible, and/or stupid attitudes or behavior
2. A person unusually capable of behaving contemptiblyEx. 1 - His boorish posts to the forum reeked of assholio.
Ex. 2 - His propensity for obnoxious posting identified him as a budding assholio.--
I first encountered this word circa 1992, used by a person steeped in Pennsylvania Dutch.
I believe the Thesaurus will also list its antonym as Coolio.
| 45 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:09:40am |
re: #26 Killgore Trout
The Dubai police chief hasn't yet had a chance to photoshop those onto the photographs of every person in Tehran wearing Western clothing.
| 46 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:09:49am |
re: #43 Floral Giraffe
And from the Wingnuts...
You gotta admire their persistence//
Not so much really.
| 47 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:10:07am |
re: #35 Killgore Trout
There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement.
Bradley ManningThese people are dangerous and should not be allowed to serve in the military.
If that guy is the sole source of the leaks (pro tip: lol no), and if his story is to be believed (hint: probably), then the State Department and the .mil have problems far, far bigger than Bradley Manning and Wikileaks.
| 48 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:12:11am |
re: #43 Floral Giraffe
And from the Wingnuts...
You gotta admire their persistence//
Reflect on the fact that it's not immediately apparent whether you made that up or not.
| 49 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:12:27am |
re: #32 DaddyG
The radical Islamists are probably under no illusions about the House of Saud's real relationship with the West. It is only the balance of their (intentionally) under- and mis-educated population which remains in the dark to varying degrees.
| 50 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:14:19am |
re: #38 DaddyG
Where is the reference to the Oathkeepers or Tea Party? I didn't find it in the Wikipedia article you cited.Its a pretty big jump from pfc with personal issues getting his 15 minutes of fame to Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers."
Oath Keepers
are military members who owe their allegiance to what they imagine the Constitution says. They are very popular with the Tea Parties
| 51 |
Dancing along the light of day Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:15:46am |
re: #48 negativ
It took them 10 more to get to George Soros!
LOL!
| 52 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:18:25am |
re: #42 negativ
One of the best words available:
assholio
ass·hol·i·o
[ass-ho-lee-oh]
- noun
1. A virtuoso display or exhibition of mean, contemptible, and/or stupid attitudes or behavior
2. A person unusually capable of behaving contemptiblyEx. 1 - His boorish posts to the forum reeked of assholio.
Ex. 2 - His propensity for obnoxious posting identified him as a budding assholio.--
I first encountered this word circa 1992, used by a person steeped in Pennsylvania Dutch.
I thought that came from Beavis and Butthead. /
| 53 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:19:55am |
re: #50 Killgore Trout
Oath Keepers
are military members who owe their allegiance to what they imagine the Constitution says. They are very popular with the Tea Parties[Video]
I am aware of what the Oath Keepers are (and its a convenient dodge of many miscreants to say they were just doing what the Constitution said they should) but what evidence do you have that PFC Bradley Manning is associated with the Oathkeepers organization or even influenced by it? That would be strange bedfellows indeed.
| 54 |
The Optimist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:24:18am |
re: #27 Alouette
This is the princes' personal bling fleet. They're not going to get them dirty or damaged by actually using them to, you know, fight and stuff.
Alouette is more right than he knows.
A high percentage of their pilots are members of the Saudi Royal Family. Family ties and nepotism are no way to select the best fighter pilots. Moreover, none of them will take any risks other than to fire missiles from 50 miles away and then race off in the other direction with soiled underwear.
| 55 |
webevintage Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:24:40am |
Hillary is on TV speaking about the leaks now....
| 56 |
Political Atheist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:24:53am |
Just reading through and I see real similarities to the coalition that threw Iraq out of Kuwait. All these Arab states recognizing a very real threat to their sphere. Saddam did have WMD's back then. He certainly had built a reactor. Now we know Iran is going nuclear.
Do we "know" they are going for warheads?
| 57 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:25:46am |
re: #56 Rightwingconspirator
Do we "know" they are going for warheads?
Let's ask Julian Assuage and have him do a little digging. /
| 58 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:26:01am |
re: #55 webevintage
Hillary is on TV speaking about the leaks now...
Eewwwwww!!!
(,,,oh ,,,, THOSE leaks ,,, nevahmind !!!!))
//
| 59 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:26:05am |
re: #50 Killgore Trout
Jack of Shadows, care to actually comment, or do you prefer to downding from the, er, shadows?
| 60 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:27:41am |
re: #59 Obdicut
Jack of Shadows, care to actually comment, or do you prefer to downding from the, er, shadows?
He'd have to change his screename then, no !?!?!
(Jack Of Out In The Open just doesn't have pizzazz!!)
| 61 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:27:54am |
re: #59 Obdicut
Jack of Shadows, care to actually comment, or do you prefer to downding from the, er, shadows?
The Tea Party nuts hate it when they're confronted with the Anti-American roots of their movement.
| 62 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:28:12am |
re: #59 Obdicut
Jack of Shadows, care to actually comment, or do you prefer to downding from the, er, shadows?
He updinged my question to Killgore. (Not that I mind updings) but he seems to have an agenda. It would be helpful to frame your dinging activity with some input Jack. We don't bite.
| 63 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:29:01am |
re: #61 Killgore Trout
The Tea Party nuts hate it when they're confronted with the Anti-American roots of their movement.
Speaking of which: Antiwar nut Justin Raimondo thrilled that the Tea Party is reviving the Birch Society
| 64 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:30:57am |
re: #61 Killgore Trout
The Tea Party nuts hate it when they're confronted with the Anti-American roots of their movement.
Manning has the support of Justin Raimondo.
| 65 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:32:35am |
re: #64 wrenchwench
And Daniel Ellsberg. Not surprising in either instance.
| 66 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:33:45am |
| 67 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:34:58am |
re: #23 Big Steve
I have not followed the wikileaks thing all that closely but help me out...these were stolen e-mails right? Back when climategate broke, we (myself included) were extremely upset that the emails were stolen and published and out of context looked bad...sort of the behind the scenes sausage making. Is there a similar sense of unease here about these emails as well? Also it is my understanding while a lot of these emails are State dept, the leak was from the Pentagon. Are we roundly kicking the Pentagon's ass or at least inferring that they are idiots for having such poor electronic protection?
The Pentagon and the Department of State have not been on friendly terms for some time now, since the decision to invade Iraq. There has been quite a bit of internecine fighting there of late.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if this ultimately turned out to be part of an interdepartmental pissing contest.
| 68 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:35:31am |
| 69 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:35:47am |
re: #54 venezuela lover
Alouette is more right than he knows.
A high percentage of their pilots are members of the Saudi Royal Family. Family ties and nepotism are no way to select the best fighter pilots. Moreover, none of them will take any risks other than to fire missiles from 50 miles away and then race off in the other direction with soiled underwear.
It is not unusual for heirs to the royal families in the Middle East's monarchies to serve in the air forces. It is safter than (a) subjecting them to the higher possibility of training accidents and/or combat fatalities among ground forces; and (b) allowing potential adversaries for power to be in the ground forces, with access to armored equipment and other weaponry suitable for staging coups.
| 70 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:36:29am |
re: #64 wrenchwench
Manning has the support of Justin Raimondo.
Among a few others...
Professor Noam Chomsky
Code Pink
Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers)
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Michael Moore
Queer Today
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
The War Resisters League
Strange bedfellows indeed... The only thing I can see that they have in common is that they are pissed off at the way America does things and they think they can do better.
| 71 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:36:51am |
| 72 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:38:06am |
| 73 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:42:40am |
re: #67 Fozzie Bear
The Pentagon and the Department of State have not been on friendly terms for some time now, since the decision to invade Iraq. There has been quite a bit of internecine fighting there of late.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if this ultimately turned out to be part of an interdepartmental pissing contest.
Fozzie, the State and Defense Departments have been at odds for as long as both agencies have existed. Generally, however, the careerists in both agencies conduct their internecine warfare in the background, each for fear of being out-ed by the other. While not impossible, therefore, that the leak sprang from the State-Defense battle, it is much more likely to have been a result of some jackass who, having been raised to believe that s/he is special and that his/her belief in what is right takes precedence over all else, decided that this information "just had to be made public".
| 74 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:44:16am |
re: #70 DaddyG
Among a few others...
Professor Noam Chomsky
Code Pink
Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers)
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Michael Moore
Queer Today
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
The War Resisters LeagueStrange bedfellows indeed... The only thing I can see that they have in common is that they are pissed off at the way America does things and they think they can do better.
They all seem to be anti-war. I think tea partiers are split on that topic. The more libertarian ones tend to be anti-war and isolationist (except for "free trade") and the Christian wingers tend to be more pro-war. I think there are too many military folks in the Oathkeepers for them to be anti-war.
| 75 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:44:55am |
I still don't see anywhere that PFC Manning
re: #35 Killgore Trout
"...was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."
I hate to be a pest (...well, I enjoy being a pest if you want honesty) but where did you get that from Killgore?
| 76 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:46:06am |
re: #74 wrenchwench
They all seem to be anti-war. I think tea partiers are split on that topic. The more libertarian ones tend to be anti-war and isolationist (except for "free trade") and the Christian wingers tend to be more pro-war. I think there are too many military folks in the Oathkeepers for them to be anti-war.
Other than anti-war the common theme seems to be "I should be in charge not them."
Whoever they are.
| 77 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:46:11am |
Iranian nuclear scientist killed, another injured in Tehran bombings
TEHRAN - A prominent Iranian nuclear scientist was killed Monday and a second was seriously wounded in nearly simultaneous car bomb attacks in the Iranian capital, the semiofficial Fars news agency reported.
The explosions, which took place near Shahid Beheshti University, are the latest in a string of recent assassination attempts in which five doctors and professors have been killed in Tehran.
Iranian authorities blamed agents of Israel and the United States for the killings, saying they want to cause chaos in the country. But leading figures in Iran's opposition movement accused the government of plotting the attacks in order to spread fear in the capital, where many oppose the regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
| 78 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:46:46am |
re: #75 DaddyG
I still don't see anywhere that PFC Manning
"...was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."I hate to be a pest (...well, I enjoy being a pest if you want honesty) but where did you get that from Killgore?
Put a period after the "from" and you may have your answer!
| 79 |
tBoy Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:47:04am |
"Wikileaks: Saudi Arabia Urged US to Attack Iran"
That's half right. The Saudi Royal Family encouraged attacks. The Saudi government ministries did not. Please watch this (you may get an initial funding appeal):
[Link: www.therealnews.com...]
| 80 |
Political Atheist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:47:39am |
re: #57 DaddyG
Seriously. Now that Iraq did not have WMD's the second time around, how sure must we be about warheads in Iran? Would the Arab world be fine if whoops, it was just nuclear power and medical isotopes?
Obviously we want to be more sure than the Arab countries need to be. I guess getting rid of Saddam was their real goal anyway in Iraq right? Not so concerned about WMD's as about Saddam still in power.
| 81 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:47:48am |
re: #77 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
saying they want to cause chaos in the country.
Too late,,, by decades!
| 82 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:50:44am |
re: #77 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Iranian authorities blamed agents of Israel and the United States for the killings, saying they want to cause chaos in the country. But leading figures in Iran's opposition movement accused the government of plotting the attacks in order to spread fear in the capital, where many oppose the regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
I just don't see the IRGC, Basij, or Savak carrying out assassinations of the group of Iranian scientists that would assist their nuclear ambitions.
And the IRGC, Basij, and Savak are already spreading fear throughout the country in the course of the continuing crackdown against any and all dissent against the regime.
| 83 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:51:17am |
South Korean president: no point in being patient with North Korea anymore
In his first full address to the nation since Pyongyang shelled the southern island of Yeongpyeong, killing four people, Lee Myung-bak, the South Korean president, said that "at long last" his country had come to realise that its previous policy of patience with North Korea "no longer makes sense."
"The South Korean people now unequivocally understand that prolonged endurance and tolerance will spawn nothing but more serious provocations," he said.
"We are aware of the historic lesson that a disgraceful peace achieved through intimidation only brings about greater harm in the end If the North commits any additional provocations against the South, we will make sure that it pays a dear price without fail."
| 84 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:52:45am |
re: #75 DaddyG
My full quote was....
There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement.
I'm taking an educated guess. It's a good possibility. He obviously felt an obligation greater than his duty as a service member. Othkeepers would give him that framework.
| 85 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:52:52am |
re: #82 lawhawk
I just don't see the IRGC, Basij, or Savak carrying out assassinations of the group of Iranian scientists that would assist their nuclear ambitions.
And the IRGC, Basij, and Savak are already spreading fear throughout the country in the course of the continuing crackdown against any and all dissent against the regime.
I can see them eliminating figures they no longer see as useful and as possible liabilities and then blaming it on the Israelis.
| 86 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:53:15am |
re: #82 lawhawk
UNLESS
those two scientists had outlived their usefullness on a project and were suspected of defecting
(or maybe I watched too many spy films when I was a kid)!
| 87 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:54:30am |
re: #80 Rightwingconspirator
I suspect their real goal was to nation build until they had a friendly democratic (marginally) Islamic (marginally) country in the heart of the middle east. WMDs were a few items down on the list even with the publicly stated goals.
| 88 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:54:48am |
re: #84 Killgore Trout
I'm taking an educated guess
Sorry, but 50% pure speculation added to 50% wishful thinking does not equate 100% of an "educated guess"
| 89 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:55:30am |
re: #85 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
re: #86 sattv4u2
That would still send the wrong message to other nuclear scientists - that their days are numbered so why work diligently to continue when the regime will simply whack you at the first opportunity. It would inevitably lead to slowdowns in productivity - so as to string out the development cycle and give the rest of the world more time to deal with the regime or hope for regime change.
| 90 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:55:33am |
| 91 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:56:07am |
re: #88 sattv4u2
I have a pretty good track record so you can go fuck yourself.
| 92 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:56:24am |
re: #89 lawhawk
re: #86 sattv4u2
That would still send the wrong message to other nuclear scientists - that their days are numbered so why work diligently to continue when the regime will simply whack you at the first opportunity. It would inevitably lead to slowdowns in productivity - so as to string out the development cycle and give the rest of the world more time to deal with the regime or hope for regime change.
Because if you DON'T work diligently your day HAS been numbered!
| 93 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:56:32am |
re: #84 Killgore Trout
My full quote was...
I'm taking an educated guess. It's a good possibility. He obviously felt an obligation greater than his duty as a service member. Othkeepers would give him that framework.
The Constitution is the last refuge of a traitor. I suspect Oathkeepers is more of a strange bedfellows situation than a direct inspiration. Although, if you do find a more direct link I would not be shocked.
| 94 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:57:15am |
re: #91 Killgore Trout
I have a pretty good track record so you can go fuck yourself.
Thanks, I'll pass
But if you're interested, we could set a date! You'll have to buy me dinner 1st though!
| 95 |
hellosnackbar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:57:16am |
Just been watching the news on bbc teevision featuring Bradley Manning and Julian Assange.
At first I thought it was a joke(Bradley Manning is a startling Alfred E Neumann lookalike).
Julian Assange (sounds like an Aussie)is in hiding.
One has to wonder at the motivation behind the Wikileaks affair?and whether
or not it's some sort of double bluff?
Either way, I suspect Bradley will not enjoy too much freedom in the next several years;whilst Julian can make a fortune.
| 96 |
The Optimist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:57:40am |
re: #69 sliv_the_eli
It is not unusual for heirs to the royal families in the Middle East's monarchies to serve in the air forces. It is safter than (a) subjecting them to the higher possibility of training accidents and/or combat fatalities among ground forces; and (b) allowing potential adversaries for power to be in the ground forces, with access to armored equipment and other weaponry suitable for staging coups.
Excellent point Sliv_the_eli,
Rephrased, this means that the monarch's heirs have to watch out not just for their own countries enemies but enemies within their own country. Either way, the goal is to protect their butts rather than protect their country. This is not the way to run a military.
| 97 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:58:55am |
re: #91 Killgore Trout
I have a pretty good track record so you can go fuck yourself.
Mandy is that you? /
| 98 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:59:30am |
re: #93 DaddyG
The Constitution is the last refuge of a traitor. I suspect Oathkeepers is more of a strange bedfellows situation than a direct inspiration. Although, if you do find a more direct link I would not be shocked.
The last thing we need is people becoming suspicious of constitutional arguments because some group of assholes made one two many appeals to what they imagine the constitution means.
The bolded sentence was one I found alarming.
| 99 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 10:59:33am |
re: #88 sattv4u2
I'm taking an educated guess
Sorry, but 50% pure speculation added to 50% wishful thinking does not equate 100% of an "educated guess"
I disagree.
I think KT's conclusion is valid. Manning's reported ideology does mesh with the Oathkeepers. His skewed 'loyalty to the Constitution' would trump his loyalty to the military.
| 100 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:00:33am |
re: #79 tBoy
"Wikileaks: Saudi Arabia Urged US to Attack Iran"
That's half right. The Saudi Royal Family encouraged attacks. The Saudi government ministries did not. Please watch this (you may get an initial funding appeal):
[Link: www.therealnews.com...]
Speaking of antiwar.com, you just linked to an interview with a guy who apparently writes for them. Are you another anti-war "booster?
| 101 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:01:19am |
re: #95 hellosnackbar
...I suspect Bradley will not enjoy too much freedom in the next several years;whilst Julian can make a fortune.
Yeah... the dumb kid was used badly. He was a willing dupe but he was used. I have a hunch Julian isn't as inspired for his love of freedom as much as he is fame and $$$.
| 102 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:03:15am |
re: #98 Fozzie Bear
The last thing we need is people becoming suspicious of constitutional arguments because some group of assholes made one two many appeals to what they imagine the constitution means.
The bolded sentence was one I found alarming.
Not my intent. I was trying to be clever and play on "prayer is the last refuge of a scoundrel" by saying a traitor will quickly try hide behind the constitution (or more accurately a skewed interpretation of the constitution) that he himself was undermining. That fell flat -sorry.
| 103 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:03:44am |
| 104 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:04:00am |
re: #101 DaddyG
Yeah... the dumb kid was used badly. He was a willing dupe but he was used. I have a hunch Julian isn't as inspired for his love of freedom as much as he is fame and $$$.
Yes, yes, that poor little mole with security clearance, and the big bad foreigner who made him do it. *roll eyes*
Wikileaks would have nothing if it weren't for volunteer spies. It's more than a little bit of a stretch to place the onus primarily on Wikileaks, imo.
| 105 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:06:00am |
re: #104 Fozzie Bear
Daddy G said "willing dupe"
You said "volunteer spies"
A difference without a distinction?
| 106 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:06:00am |
re: #100 wrenchwench
Speaking of antiwar.com, you just linked to an interview with a guy who apparently writes for them. Are you another anti-war "booster?
I just saw this.
Good catch.
| 107 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:06:26am |
re: #37 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
What I learned from Rush today.
The leaks came from the State Department, and "The Clintons" run the State Department, and back in the days when real men ran things, Assange would have been mysteriously killed by now which all means...something.
Right.
It's why she's saying these things.
– Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Monday the administration is "taking aggressive steps" to hold responsible those who stole sensitive documents made public by WikiLeaks. She also said new protections are being put in place at the State Department to prevent more such leaks from taking place.– Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Monday that the WikiLeaks disclosure of sensitive diplomatic documents "is not just an attack on America's foreign policy interests. It is an attack on the international community."
| 108 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:07:07am |
re: #106 researchok
I just saw this.
Good catch.
He registered moments before posting that, so I was on alert....
| 109 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:07:24am |
re: #107 reine.de.tout
Right.
It's why she's saying these things.
A cunning plan by the Clintons to obscure their true motives!
/
| 110 |
Dancing along the light of day Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:07:54am |
re: #100 wrenchwench
It's a hatchling from today..
| 111 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:10:17am |
re: #99 researchok
I disagree.
I think KT's conclusion is valid. Manning's reported ideology does mesh with the Oathkeepers. His skewed 'loyalty to the Constitution' would trump his loyalty to the military.
Killgore's full quote was:
There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement.
...I asked where he found the link and he said it was an educated guess. I found no evidence and Killgore supplied no evidence of Manning being part of the Oathkeepers. If he had said Manning could have been inspired by the Oathkeepers I would not have questioned it. As stated he makes a strong statement with no corroberating evidence other than some of the beliefs of Manning and the Oathkeepers are consistent. Something that can also be said of:
Professor Noam Chomsky
Code Pink
Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers)
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Michael Moore
Queer Today
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
The War Resisters League
and a host of others.
Yes Killgore your track record is pretty good on calling connections. In this case you may have overstated the connection between Manning and the Oathkeepers. You could be proven correct in the end.
Not reason to go ape on SatTV for pointing it out.
| 112 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:11:08am |
re: #103 sattv4u2
OT
Do you get to meet the "new boss" (Deal?)
Not yet. Just trying to get on his calender. He's made some choices to keep certain staffers that could help my programs.
(It is very slow between holidays and administrations - can you tell my posting has gone up significantly?)
| 113 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:13:32am |
re: #104 Fozzie Bear
Yes, yes, that poor little mole with security clearance, and the big bad foreigner who made him do it. *roll eyes*
Wikileaks would have nothing if it weren't for volunteer spies. It's more than a little bit of a stretch to place the onus primarily on Wikileaks, imo.
Your words not mine. The kid is culpable (along with the idiots who made copying the top secret info so easy). Assuage is a nasty character because he uses the info for his own benefit at the cost of others lives and the security of nations. I placed the onus on no one. They are both "bad" in my eyes.
| 114 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:13:59am |
I also learned this bit of logic today from Rush.
1) New York is loosing millions in taxes due to black marker cigarettes being sold. This is a good thing apparently.
2) The black market cigs are supposedly all coming from Indian reservations who are getting back at the white man, but helping out law abiding smokers from having to pay a repressive tax.
3) Smokers are the real heroes because their tax dollars are going to pay for all the state nanny programs.
A question for Rush: If the smokers are buying black market cigarettes, how are their tax dollars going towards the programs that you hate, but give them credit for?
| 115 |
William of Orange Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:14:11am |
I don't know what to do with this article. I mean, yesterday you and everyone in here condemned the action of Wikileaks to release these documents en now, a day later, you bring the Saudi wish to bomb Iran as news.
On one hand condemning the release and after that running away with the information?
Mixed feelings here.
| 116 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:14:39am |
re: #105 sattv4u2
Daddy G said "willing dupe"
You said "volunteer spies"A difference without a distinction?
To call the leaker a "willing dupe" who was "used" is to imply that somehow he wasn't fully in control of his own actions, or is somehow not fully responsible for making the decision to leak the documents. While I get that it fits a narrative that would make Wikileaks more responsible for the damage done, and Americans less responsible, it is an absurd characterization.
Wikileaks would have nothing if it weren't for people in positions of responsibility willingly and knowingly divulging state secrets. Wikileaks took no oath of allegiance to the United States. The soldier did. It is 100% his responsibility for leaking these documents. Wikileaks is responsible for publicizing them. Neither party's guilt is ameliorated by the actions of the other, at all.
There are no dupes here, no victims, other than the security of some classified information.
The characterization of the leaker as victim is patently absurd, and I am frankly surprised anybody was willing to attempt to spin it that way.
| 117 |
Todd Pearson Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:15:15am |
Two thoughts. First, whoever did this is a first-grade asshole and traitor. Second, it is not going to damage our relations with other countries in any significant way.
For 3 months in 1986, I worked as an intern of the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs at the State Department. I had a top secret security clearance, but I was just a college student. My first task every day was to go through volumes of diplomatic cables that had come in and pick out those that my boss might want to see. Nothing would have stopped me from walking the pile of cables to the Washington Post on a daily basis. You can't provide communications to thousands of people, and reasonably assume that everyone is going to honor the confidence.
What I also soon learned is that the real world of international politics is not what you read in the newspaper. It is way more complicated, and way more cut-throat than I had ever understood. Obviously, everybody in that professional cut-throat world from any country already knows what I learned that summer.
In short, this is outrageous, yet probably harmless in the end. In fact, reminding the rest of the world that we are not idealistic suckers might be a good thing.
| 118 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:15:48am |
re: #115 William of Orange
I don't know what to do with this article. I mean, yesterday you and everyone in here condemned the action of Wikileaks to release these documents en now, a day later, you bring the Saudi wish to bomb Iran as news.
On one hand condemning the release and after that running away with the information?
Mixed feelings here.
Should we avert our eyes? We can't put it back in the horse....
| 119 |
lostlakehiker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:16:21am |
re: #84 Killgore Trout
My full quote was...
I'm taking an educated guess. It's a good possibility. He obviously felt an obligation greater than his duty as a service member. Othkeepers would give him that framework.
Quite clearly, whoever did it is a bad bad person, meaning, the kind of person I don't like. So it was a {tea party, Democrat, Republican, Muslim, Jew, Communist, Pharisee, Jesuit} take your pick. Or maybe we can wait and see.
There are so many categories to pick from that there is NOT a "good chance" it comes from any particular one of them.
As to whether we should in fact attack Iran, it's easy for Saudi Arabia to say let's you and him fight. We already have a war, after all. We can fight another if we must, and the way things are going with N Korea, there's a real chance it'll come to war. The Argentine Junta started a war with Britain for the crass purpose of changing the subject from its own misrule, after all.
Can we fight a third war? How many wars are enough to keep us busy? And war with Iran would not be a sideshow. Iran is much stronger than Iraq was. The heart and center of Iran is the city of Tehran. The kind of war we're talking about is not a matter of missiles and genocide. It's not a matter of surgical strikes, because scalpels wont go through hundreds of meters of rock to tunnels we can't see and won't know about until our troops luck upon an entrance. The entrances themselves will be heavily camouflaged. Only an occupation army can stick around and look thoroughly enough to find them.
The regime in Iran may be unpopular, but a U.S. invasion would be more unpopular. The war into which Saudi Arabia invites us would be a thankless, grueling twilight struggle of IED's, lesser booby traps, nasty little combats with insurgents dressed as civilians, nasty little combats with civilians who looked like insurgents, and casualties on a scale that would make the 9/11 war to date look like peace.
And that's after the "kinetic" phase of the war was over. We'd have a sharp fight, going for more than just a couple of weeks this time, to dispose of the Iranian regular forces. Tehran is well inland from any starting point we might use, and the terrain is not easy.
During this part of the fight, the straits of Hormuz would be closed by Iranian anti-ship missile bases dotted along the Iranian coast.
We've got our economic troubles, too. If we fight this war, something has to give. Will the Republicans agree to 40% taxes on the middle class, and 70% on the rich? Will the Democrats agree to suspending the health care bill, freezing or rolling back social security payments, or any other reduction in civilian spending?
War with Iran may come in any event. If it comes at a time of Iran's choosing, it would be a nuclear war. You'd think they'd have sense enough not to make that choice. If they did, it would be horrible. But let us not delude ourselves. A conventional war, near term, on our own schedule and before Iran gets nukes, would still be no small matter.
| 120 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:16:21am |
re: #112 DaddyG
Not yet. Just trying to get on his calender. He's made some choices to keep certain staffers that could help my programs.
(It is very slow between holidays and administrations - can you tell my posting has gone up significantly?)
Yes ,, and he's prolly busy lining up his team and will get to those (like you) that bridge admins later (after he gets sworn in)
| 122 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:17:36am |
re: #114 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
It doesn't make sense though. Indians don't charge tax on their cigs anyway. That's not black market. That's the way the gov set it up.
Wrapping my head around Rush logic is always painful.
| 123 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:17:45am |
re: #116 Fozzie Bear
Wikileaks would have nothing if it weren't for people in positions of responsibility willingly and knowingly divulging state secrets
Hence ,,, "WILLING dupe"
Thanks!
| 124 |
Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:18:30am |
i love how the ME countries are urging us to hit Iran but won't pony up and do it themselves.
| 125 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:18:39am |
re: #111 DaddyG
Killgore's full quote was:
There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement.
...I asked where he found the link and he said it was an educated guess. I found no evidence and Killgore supplied no evidence of Manning being part of the Oathkeepers. If he had said Manning could have been inspired by the Oathkeepers I would not have questioned it. As stated he makes a strong statement with no corroberating evidence other than some of the beliefs of Manning and the Oathkeepers are consistent. Something that can also be said of:
Professor Noam Chomsky
Code Pink
Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers)
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Michael Moore
Queer Today
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
The War Resisters League
and a host of others.Yes Killgore your track record is pretty good on calling connections. In this case you may have overstated the connection between Manning and the Oathkeepers. You could be proven correct in the end.
Not reason to go ape on SatTV for pointing it out.
I went ape??
All I said was that given Manning's already stated predilections, I thought KT may be on to something.
Neither KT ore myself ever implied this was certain.
| 126 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:19:02am |
re: #116 Fozzie Bear
To call the leaker a "willing dupe" who was "used" is to imply that somehow he wasn't fully in control of his own actions, or is somehow not fully responsible for making the decision to leak the documents. While I get that it fits a narrative that would make Wikileaks more responsible for the damage done, and Americans less responsible, it is an absurd characterization.
Wikileaks would have nothing if it weren't for people in positions of responsibility willingly and knowingly divulging state secrets. Wikileaks took no oath of allegiance to the United States. The soldier did. It is 100% his responsibility for leaking these documents. Wikileaks is responsible for publicizing them. Neither party's guilt is ameliorated by the actions of the other, at all.
There are no dupes here, no victims, other than the security of some classified information.
The characterization of the leaker as victim is patently absurd, and I am frankly surprised anybody was willing to attempt to spin it that way.
Agree. The kid was a volunteer who knowingly broke his oath.
And for what? A bunch of stuff that is mildly embarrassing at best? Is it a big surprise that other countries are freaked out by Iran? Or that Khaddafi is a freak?
| 127 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:19:10am |
re: #116 Fozzie Bear
To put it simply I used the word dupe to describe the kid because he gets to go to Leavenworth and break rocks while Assuage pads his bank account. Not because I believe in any way the kid was tricked into getting the information.
I don't mind being called out on a misstatement but please don't add meaning to what I write in order to argue with some fictional belief:
For example: "Yes, yes, that poor little mole with security clearance, and the big bad foreigner who made him do it. *roll eyes*" is not something I wrote or believe.
| 128 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:19:40am |
re: #122 marjoriemoon
It doesn't make sense though. Indians don't charge tax on their cigs anyway. That's not black market. That's the way the gov set it up.
Wrapping my head around Rush logic is always painful.
It helps if you remember that the man is a bloviating asshole.
| 129 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:20:33am |
re: #125 researchok
I went ape??
All I said was that given Manning's already stated predilections, I thought KT may be on to something.
Neither KT ore myself ever implied this was certain.
Killgore went "FU" on Sat not you.
| 130 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:20:44am |
re: #117 Todd Pearson
Two thoughts. First, whoever did this is a first-grade asshole and traitor. Second, it is not going to damage our relations with other countries in any significant way.
For 3 months in 1986, I worked as an intern of the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs at the State Department. I had a top secret security clearance, but I was just a college student. My first task every day was to go through volumes of diplomatic cables that had come in and pick out those that my boss might want to see. Nothing would have stopped me from walking the pile of cables to the Washington Post on a daily basis. You can't provide communications to thousands of people, and reasonably assume that everyone is going to honor the confidence.
What I also soon learned is that the real world of international politics is not what you read in the newspaper. It is way more complicated, and way more cut-throat than I had ever understood. Obviously, everybody in that professional cut-throat world from any country already knows what I learned that summer.
In short, this is outrageous, yet probably harmless in the end. In fact, reminding the rest of the world that we are not idealistic suckers might be a good thing.
Good post. Can I ask why you've sat around for a year until now?
| 131 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:20:45am |
re: #125 researchok
They're just upset because they don't like the implications of my speculation. We still have people here in denial about how crazy the Tea Parties have gone.
| 132 |
Summer Seale Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:21:23am |
re: #34 DaddyG
Having Julian Assuage's personal e-mails and instant messages published for the world to see would be interesting. Not that I'd advocate such a grevious breach of privacy mind you...
I would.
Julian Assange is the idiot bull in the porcelain shop.
In some ways, I could understand the first two big leaks, though I didn't condone them. I understood because some of it did reveal some fairly shockingly egregious behavior on the part of government forces which should know better. I disapproved of the methods, but I understood in part the motivation.
This, however, is entirely different. Diplomats don't go around assassinating civilians. Diplomats are delicately trying, albeit frequently failing, to build a more peaceful world. Sometimes it takes literally years of painstaking work in trust and negotiations to achieve a positive result. Most negotiations are done in absolute secrecy for this reason. For example: The Oslo Accords. And before anyone forgets: Oslo did work for a while. It's a shame it fell apart, but there was a peace for a few years which was looking good.
Imagine the premature damage that could have been done around the conference table should such leaks have occurred during that time. We'd be worse off now for it. Imagine the damage that could be done by these leaks today should some party decide that they have been insulted enough to get up, walk away, and start shooting again.
I fully remember the Bush years just before the start of the war in Iraq, when people compared him to a bull in a porcelain shop as well - for the exact same reason. Mostly people on the left, mind you. They went on and on about how Bush was destroying the delicate diplomatic ties that were painstakingly built up for years and years and putting all of it in danger with his cowboy attitude.
Perhaps. But he had a far better goal in mind than simply to piss off all the diplomats in the world and embarrass world leaders. And then in walks that scrawny little twit who thinks that he should one-up what he probably sees as a fatal flaw of the Bush administration, purely to "expose"...what, exactly? The fact that diplomats have opinions about each world leader they negotiate with?
All for the aggrandizement and ego of that fetid little puritanical anarchist. What a farce.
He's supposed to be interested in peace and justice? This isn't peace and justice - it's total chaos. That's what he's bringing at this point. For somebody who thinks that it's best not to go to war, he doesn't leave many other options with this kind of release of information.
A lot of people are jumping on the bandwagon saying that the world has changed because of the internet, and that we have to change the way of doing things because of it. Perhaps yes. But human nature hasn't changed. Human nature is as fickle and sensitive as it has always been. When diplomats give their frank assessments in private, the last thing they need is for the other party to hear it - and that goes for the other side as well. Only a simpleton who thinks the world is a far less complex place than it really is really believes in this sort of idiotic release of information.
It matters far more what the result of negotiations are, or in some cases the lack of action (I.E. Not going to war) than what the personal impressions are of particular diplomats. But to air the personal impressions puts all those results in jeopardy.
So thank you, Mr. Assange, for getting us a few minutes closer to the doomsday clock striking midnight. There aren't a lot of people who have accomplished that without pulling triggers in the history of the world, but you're definitely up on the list now.
| 133 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:21:39am |
re: #124 Dreggas
i love how the ME countries are urging us to hit Iran but won't pony up and do it themselves.
That surprises you? Weren't these the same countries that "urged" us to push Saddam out of Kuwait (knowing that perhaps they were next on his grievence list")???
| 134 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:22:07am |
re: #129 DaddyG
Killgore went "FU" on Sat not you.
Hey ,, if I can get a good free meal out of it ,,,,,,
:)
| 135 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:23:15am |
re: #123 sattv4u2
Wikileaks would have nothing if it weren't for people in positions of responsibility willingly and knowingly divulging state secrets
Hence ,,, "WILLING dupe"
Thanks!
The word dupe implies victimhood. If one is going to make arguments attributing responsibility for an action to a party other than the one committing the actual act, one uses the word "dupe" to describe this attribution. It's odd that I have to explain the meanings of commonly used English words here of all places. Willingness to be deceived is almost oxymoronic. Either he was victim (dupe) of another's actions, or he wasn't, and is thus fully responsible for his own actions.
Words have specific meanings. In this case, the word used is one often used to shift blame.
| 136 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:23:22am |
| 137 |
Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:23:33am |
re: #133 sattv4u2
I'm not surprised. I know how that went down WRT Kuwait. It's hard to adapt a mocking tone through text, that is mocking them for their unwillingness to do the deed.
| 138 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:24:17am |
re: #119 lostlakehiker
As to whether we should in fact attack Iran, it's easy for Saudi Arabia to say let's you and him fight. We already have a war, after all. We can fight another if we must, and the way things are going with N Korea, there's a real chance it'll come to war. The Argentine Junta started a war with Britain for the crass purpose of changing the subject from its own misrule, after all.Can we fight a third war? How many wars are enough to keep us busy? And war with Iran would not be a sideshow. Iran is much stronger than Iraq was. The heart and center of Iran is the city of Tehran. The kind of war we're talking about is not a matter of missiles and genocide. It's not a matter of surgical strikes, because scalpels wont go through hundreds of meters of rock to tunnels we can't see and won't know about until our troops luck upon an entrance. The entrances themselves will be heavily camouflaged. Only an occupation army can stick around and look thoroughly enough to find them.
The regime in Iran may be unpopular, but a U.S. invasion would be more unpopular. The war into which Saudi Arabia invites us would be a thankless, grueling twilight struggle of IED's, lesser booby traps, nasty little combats with insurgents dressed as civilians, nasty little combats with civilians who looked like insurgents, and casualties on a scale that would make the 9/11 war to date look like peace.
And that's after the "kinetic" phase of the war was over. We'd have a sharp fight, going for more than just a couple of weeks this time, to dispose of the Iranian regular forces. Tehran is well inland from any starting point we might use, and the terrain is not easy.
During this part of the fight, the straits of Hormuz would be closed by Iranian anti-ship missile bases dotted along the Iranian coast.
We've got our economic troubles, too. If we fight this war, something has to give. Will the Republicans agree to 40% taxes on the middle class, and 70% on the rich? Will the Democrats agree to suspending the health care bill, freezing or rolling back social security payments, or any other reduction in civilian spending?
War with Iran may come in any event. If it comes at a time of Iran's choosing, it would be a nuclear war. You'd think they'd have sense enough not to make that choice. If they did, it would be horrible. But let us not delude ourselves. A conventional war, near term, on our own schedule and before Iran gets nukes, would still be no small matter.
Thank you for a very cogent analysis of the difficulties of military action against Iran. There are a lot of people that can't see past their (completely appropriate) distaste for the Iranian regime to see what a mess military action would create. To borrow a phrase, this is a "problem from hell", and anyone with a glib easy answer for it is wrong.
| 140 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:26:26am |
re: #135 Fozzie Bear
will·ing /ˈwɪlɪŋ/ Show Spelled
[wil-ing] Show IPA
–adjective
1. disposed or consenting; inclined: willing to go along.
2. cheerfully consenting or ready: a willing worker.
3. done, given, borne, used, etc., with cheerful readiness.
| 141 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:26:59am |
re: #132 Summer
Very possibly the best assessment of Assange and the current mess that I've come across.
| 142 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:27:14am |
| 143 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:29:14am |
re: #131 Killgore Trout
They're just upset because they don't like the implications of my speculation. We still have people here in denial about how crazy the Tea Parties have gone.
Does they include me? I'm not a Tea Partier (or a fan) and I spend a lot of time reminding my conservative friends that they are no friends of ours.
Your full quote: "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."
...speculated that Manning was a part of the Oathkeepers. That has proven to be a fairly unsubstantiated speculation. Don't be so damned defensive when called on the fact that there are no facts behind that speculation other than similarities in their approach to their lack of faith in the chain of command and their misreading of the Consitution.
| 145 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:31:04am |
re: #143 DaddyG
You're on the road to join us for pre-coital dinner!
| 146 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:32:04am |
re: #131 Killgore Trout
They're just upset because they don't like the implications of my speculation. We still have people here in denial about how crazy the Tea Parties have gone.
You know, I'm not sure if it is a denial of those crazies who are in the TP (and by no means are all TP members crazy).
I do believe that many people are denial that our entire system is both so fragile and broken. As your page indirectly implies, we live in a world where the likes of Justin Raimondo are considered credible by elements of both the left and right.
You touched a nerve in an environment where everyone is raw.
| 147 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:32:05am |
re: #143 DaddyG
I'm sorry that you find the possibility so outrageous. I can't help you.
| 148 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:33:04am |
And on that note ,,,,Off to do a bevy of errands
Ahh ,,, I just LOVE my days off!! ((grumble grumble grumble))
| 149 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:33:23am |
re: #143 DaddyG
Does they include me? I'm not a Tea Partier (or a fan) and I spend a lot of time reminding my conservative friends that they are no friends of ours.
Your full quote: "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."
...speculated that Manning was a part of the Oathkeepers. That has proven to be a fairly unsubstantiated speculation. Don't be so damned defensive when called on the fact that there are no facts behind that speculation other than similarities in their approach to their lack of faith in the chain of command and their misreading of the Consitution.
But he was clear- it was speculation and no more.
| 150 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:34:55am |
re: #132 Summer
I applaud your last paragraph and I also agree that every bit of Assange's personal info should be posted on as many websites as possible Meanwhile, he's hiding out, isn't he? Oh the irony.
The other things you said, I don't agree. The last thing Dubya was was a diplomat. Clinton was a diplomat. Even Obama, but George Bush? The Axis of Evil? The only foreign gov who respected him were the Saudis. George is a hard-ass which isn't necessarily bad, but a good pres is both. A hard-ass and a diplomat.
Also, Oslo was a disaster from the world Go. There was no peace then. In fact, more Israelis were killed in the years following Oslo than before that agreement.
| 151 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:35:45am |
re: #147 Killgore Trout
I'm sorry that you find the possibility so outrageous. I can't help you.
Where did he say that?
Where did I say that?
YOU stated "theres a good chance"! We were asking for something more substantial than your "track record"
That you can't understand that, or got your panties in a bunch for being called on it, well, thats a YOU problem not an US problem
| 152 |
Cineaste Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:35:50am |
I have to confess that I'm actually a little surprised at how little has come out that was surprising from these leaks. A few juicy details that are interesting but really, in a strategic sense, nothing terribly stunning.
| 153 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:35:52am |
re: #147 Killgore Trout
I'm sorry that you find the possibility so outrageous. I can't help you.
I don't find the possibility outrageous. In fact I wrote I wouldn't be shocked if you found evidence. I just called you on overstating the connection between Manning and Oathkeepers.
I'm sorry you are too married to having a "great track record" to be aware that your own unsubstantiated speculation undermines your credibility as an anti-idolitarian.
| 154 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:36:17am |
re: #146 researchok
You know, I'm not sure if it is a denial of those crazies who are in the TP (and by no means are all TP members crazy).
I do believe that many people are denial that our entire system is both so fragile and broken. As your page indirectly implies, we live in a world where the likes of Justin Raimondo are considered credible by elements of both the left and right.
You touched a nerve in an environment where everyone is raw.
I was also reminded of this last night after reading a stupid article by Glenn Greenwald. I always assumed he was a lefty but after checking up on him he's a paleocon libertarian butjob who just looked like a lefty under the Bush years. Same thing with somebody like Adrew Sullivan who I suspect (more outrageously putrageous speculation) may revert to being a conservative now that the Tea Party has made craziness a main feature in right wing politics. We are going to see more nuts gravitating to the Right over the next few years.
| 155 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:36:54am |
re: #150 marjoriemoon
I applaud your last paragraph and I also agree that every bit of Assange's personal info should be posted on as many websites as possible Meanwhile, he's hiding out, isn't he? Oh the irony.
The other things you said, I don't agree. The last thing Dubya was was a diplomat. Clinton was a diplomat. Even Obama, but George Bush? The Axis of Evil? The only foreign gov who respected him were the Saudis. George is a hard-ass which isn't necessarily bad, but a good pres is both. A hard-ass and a diplomat.
Also, Oslo was a disaster from the world Go. There was no peace then. In fact, more Israelis were killed in the years following Oslo than before that agreement.
Sorry, check here.
[Link: www.mfa.gov.il...]
| 156 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:37:06am |
re: #154 Killgore Trout
I was also reminded of this last night after reading a stupid article by Glenn Greenwald. I always assumed he was a lefty but after checking up on him he's a paleocon libertarian butjob who just looked like a lefty under the Bush years. Same thing with somebody like Adrew Sullivan who I suspect (more outrageously putrageous speculation) may revert to being a conservative now that the Tea Party has made craziness a main feature in right wing politics. We are going to see more nuts gravitating to the Right over the next few years.
How dare you speculate further./
| 157 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:37:29am |
re: #149 researchok
But he was clear- it was speculation and no more.
Then why the "FU"??
Why take it so personal?!?
He got called on his "speculation" and didn't react well to it
Again, thats a HIM problem not a ME problem
| 158 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:40:21am |
re: #153 DaddyG
I guess Killgore's downding means he's done discussing the point.
Nice. Way to build credibility and bolster that great track record.
Get back to me when you find actual evidence that bolsters your speculation that: (And I quote) "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."
| 159 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:40:58am |
re: #157 sattv4u2
Then why the "FU"??
Why take it so personal?!?He got called on his "speculation" and didn't react well to it
Again, thats a HIM problem not a ME problem
You don't have the best track record with English today.
spec·u·la·tion n.
1.
a. Contemplation or consideration of a subject; meditation.
b. A conclusion, opinion, or theory reached by conjecture.
c. Reasoning based on inconclusive evidence; conjecture or supposition.
| 160 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:41:08am |
re: #114 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Since I follow tax policy pretty closely - and know the NY and NJ political process fairly well, here's my take:
NY smokers may be helping NJ and CT and PA taxpayers by sending their smoking $$$ to those states, rather than spending their money on cigarettes in NYS. NYC and NYS may be losing tax revenues to black market cigarettes sold online or in brick and mortar stores (without the tax stamps), and from Indian reservations (an issue that has been ongoing for several generations now). The city and state see the lost tax revenues and hope to get more via compliance.
Bottom line is that the tax hikes in NY aren't generating the revenues they expected, and the programs that relied on that increased revenue suffer because they aren't getting the funding as expected. That means the money has to come from elsewhere in the budget - and as anyone who follows the NYS budget should know - there's no money because the state is broke.
Of course, the state also raised spending by a couple billion dollars at the same time they raised taxes and fees by about a billion dollars and change - as if no one would notice that discrepancy.
So, the budget is all screwed up.
Again.
But Rush's logic and reasoning doesn't stand scrutiny either.
| 161 |
Todd Pearson Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:42:08am |
re: #130 marjoriemoonI speak in comments threads when I think that I have something to contribute. It is not a general hobby.
| 162 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:42:36am |
Oh , and BTW
If anyone comes across a Red Eared Slider turtle, (shell) about 7 inches long X 3 inches wide, let me know
Mrs Satty took it out of it's tank and put it in the backyard yesterday so it could get some excersize, phone rang, she went and answered,,, 2 hours later remembered she let the turtle out and now it's Gonzo!
| 163 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:42:47am |
re: #158 DaddyG
You're now the one who seems defensive.
He's speculated. He said there's a good chance, and explained why-- the similarity of their motives, loyalty to the constitution above anything else. To you, this is insufficient, but it does form the basis for a conjecture.
What exactly are you demanding, that wouldn't be actual proof of a link?
| 164 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:42:49am |
re: #159 Fozzie Bear
spec·u·la·tion n.
1.
a. Contemplation or consideration of a subject; meditation.
b. A conclusion, opinion, or theory reached by conjecture.
c. Reasoning based on inconclusive evidence; conjecture or supposition.
inconclusive evidence, conjecture... yup that pretty much describes the original speculation.
| 165 |
Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:43:10am |
re: #160 lawhawk
My folks go to the indian reservation a couple times a month to stock up on tobacco. They roll their own smokes now since the state (NY) started limiting the number of cartons a person could purchase at one time from the Reservation. The taxes on smokes in NY pushed the cost up enormously, can't blame people who don't want to quit who go for other, cheaper, means of getting their fix.
| 166 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:43:50am |
re: #154 Killgore Trout
I was also reminded of this last night after reading a stupid article by Glenn Greenwald. I always assumed he was a lefty but after checking up on him he's a paleocon libertarian butjob who just looked like a lefty under the Bush years. Same thing with somebody like Adrew Sullivan who I suspect (more outrageously putrageous speculation) may revert to being a conservative now that the Tea Party has made craziness a main feature in right wing politics. We are going to see more nuts gravitating to the Right over the next few years.
Don't get me started on Greenwald.
He and I had it out a while back (sock puppets and all). He's a martyr/publicity hound all rolled into one- and he's always sure to remind you just how much smarter he is than you. He is also a self righteous moralizing SOB.
You are too kind re his 'speculation'. He's a conspiracy monger and I'm being kind about it.
As for the crazies on the right, well, it was inevitable. As I have noted before the GOP will have to reinvent themselves in same way the Dems did in the 70's.
| 167 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:44:27am |
re: #162 sattv4u2
Oh , and BTW
If anyone comes across a Red Eared Slider turtle, (shell) about 7 inches long X 3 inches wide, let me know
Mrs Satty took it out of it's tank and put it in the backyard yesterday so it could get some excersize, phone rang, she went and answered,,, 2 hours later remembered she let the turtle out and now it's Gonzo!
Uh-oh.
Somebody's having turtle soup for dinner, perhaps.
Sorry satt.
| 168 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:45:39am |
re: #157 sattv4u2
Then why the "FU"??
Why take it so personal?!?He got called on his "speculation" and didn't react well to it
Again, thats a HIM problem not a ME problem
Why the FU?
Because for a moment, he was a jackass.
So what?
| 169 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:46:28am |
Full debate video:Hitchens vs Blair
| 170 |
Walter L. Newton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:46:30am |
re: #162 sattv4u2
Oh , and BTW
If anyone comes across a Red Eared Slider turtle, (shell) about 7 inches long X 3 inches wide, let me know
Mrs Satty took it out of it's tank and put it in the backyard yesterday so it could get some excersize, phone rang, she went and answered,,, 2 hours later remembered she let the turtle out and now it's Gonzo!
Are they called "slider" turtles because you can hold them in the palm of your hand and rub them back and forth against the floor and go "vroom... vroom... vroom?"
| 171 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:47:05am |
re: #164 DaddyG
inconclusive evidence, conjecture... yup that pretty much describes the original speculation.
It was never described otherwise. KT said "there's a good chance" that this is Oathkeepers-related. Given that the Oathkeepers feel they are bound to a higher oath than that they take when joining the service, his assessment is of course accurate on its face. We have here, in the US, a group of military servicemen who feel that they can disregard orders as they see fit. This would be a perfect example of the kind of thing that attitude leads to.
KT's assessment was of course speculation, but speculation consistent with what we know of the Oathkeepers. He never claimed any inside knowledge. I have a feeling you just don't like the implication.
| 172 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:47:13am |
re: #169 Killgore Trout
Full debate video:Hitchens vs Blair
I saw that.
Over all, I was underwhelmed.
| 173 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:47:21am |
re: #163 Obdicut
You're now the one who seems defensive.
He's speculated. He said there's a good chance, and explained why-- the similarity of their motives, loyalty to the constitution above anything else. To you, this is insufficient, but it does form the basis for a conjecture.
What exactly are you demanding, that wouldn't be actual proof of a link?
Proof of any kind would be nice. Otherwise the speculation is no more valid than if I said "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of liberal endorsed Code Pink anti-millitary movement."
If I did that (and meant it) the left of center Lizards would be all over my ass. Killgores celebrity status and the use of the modifier "there is a good chance" does not excuse him substantiating his speculations.
I'm somewhat surprised in that he usually does a good job of substanciating he claims.
| 174 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:47:29am |
re: #167 reine.de.tout
Uh-oh.
Somebody's having turtle soup for dinner, perhaps.
Sorry satt.
N/P (kinda)
It's actually kinda a pain in the ass
The tank has to be cleaned every 10-14 days or it STINKS to high heaven
Was bought as a little pet for my son 8 years ago (or so) and now that he's 16 he could care less about it.
| 175 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:49:03am |
re: #173 DaddyG
Proof of any kind would be nice. Otherwise the speculation is no more valid than if I said "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of liberal endorsed Code Pink anti-millitary movement."
If I did that (and meant it) the left of center Lizards would be all over my ass. Killgores celebrity status and the use of the modifier "there is a good chance" does not excuse him substantiating his speculations.
I'm somewhat surprised in that he usually does a good job of substanciating he claims.
Speculation doesn't require proof. It requires an argument, which was made. If you want more substantiation, do some reading about the Oathkeepers.
| 176 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:49:29am |
re: #174 sattv4u2
N/P (kinda)
It's actually kinda a pain in the ass
The tank has to be cleaned every 10-14 days or it STINKS to high heaven
Was bought as a little pet for my son 8 years ago (or so) and now that he's 16 he could care less about it.
Uh-Oh... we've got an adopted turtle now that we just had to buy a small fish tank for. The cats broke her plastic terrarium.
| 177 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:50:02am |
re: #173 DaddyG
Otherwise the speculation is no more valid than if I said "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of liberal endorsed Code Pink anti-millitary movement."
There's a reasonable chance he's associated with Code Pink, yes. They're certainly supporters of his. There is somewhat less reason to believe this than with Oathkeepers, given that there are many, many military people who are Oathkeepers and very few military members who are part of or associated with Code Pink, but he's obviously an 'exceptional' fellow anyway.
I'm somewhat surprised in that he usually does a good job of substanciating he claims.
I'm surprised that you're so hostile to a speculation that was voiced about a 'chance', and that you're saying it's wrong to speculate at all without proof. You're basically saying any speculation is wrong. I don't get why.
| 178 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:50:09am |
Another mainstream conservative blog now feels safe linking to 9-11 truth sites: Did the TSA Back Down?
The first link goes to Alex Jones' Prison planet.
| 179 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:50:44am |
re: #178 Killgore Trout
Shit, Volokh, really? I thought better of them. Fuckin' A.
| 180 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:51:05am |
re: #176 DaddyG
Uh-Oh... we've got an adopted turtle now that we just had to buy a small fish tank for. The cats broke her plastic terrarium.
I've got a 10 and a 20 gallon aquarium with all the filters/ rocks/ food/ ect for a turtle. Once yours outgrows the small tank, give me a call!
| 181 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:52:11am |
re: #170 Walter L. Newton
Are they called "slider" turtles because you can hold them in the palm of your hand and rub them back and forth against the floor and go "vroom... vroom... vroom?"
No,,, de-shelled and cooked properly they slide down your throat!
| 182 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:52:22am |
re: #175 Fozzie Bear
Speculation doesn't require proof. It requires an argument, which was made. If you want more substantiation, do some reading about the Oathkeepers.
I don't need substantiation of the Oathkeepers. I asked for substantiation of the assertion about Manning (Quote) "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."
Really - there's a good chance of that? Because they have similar motives? In that case there's a good chance Manning was affiliated with or inspired by:
Professo Noam Chomsky
Code Pink
Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers)
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Michael Moore
Queer Today
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
or
The War Resisters League...
Now where is the evidence of such claims? (Or does my use of "there's a good chance" excuse me from having to back up my speculations?)
| 183 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:52:37am |
This could be real problematic for the Saudi royal family.
| 184 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:53:10am |
re: #178 Killgore Trout
Another mainstream conservative blog now feels safe linking to 9-11 truth sites: Did the TSA Back Down?
The first link goes to Alex Jones' Prison planet.
From the same blog...
“Say it ain’t so, Matt”
So Drudge’s ties to Prison Planet make me wonder if he’s gone off the deep end. Or, to be fair, since I’ve heard that Matt Drudge is a little disengaged from the site these days, maybe he simply made a bad hire in recent months.
Or it could be that the Drudge Report only links to Prison Planet when it really wants to run a story but can’t find a respectable source for it. (That would explain the latest link.)
But I’m not sure that any of those explanations really reconciles me to Drudge’s new fondness for Prison Planet. No one wants an editor who just makes things up to fit his view of the world. And it seems to me that the line between using “Prison Planet” as a source and just plain making things up is too thin for comfort.
So, what do you think? Am I being unfair to Drudge? To Prison Planet? Or is the Drudge Report finally jumping the shark?
Heh.
| 185 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:53:24am |
re: #182 DaddyG
I don't need substantiation of the Oathkeepers. I asked for substantiation of the assertion about Manning (Quote) "There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement."
Really - there's a good chance of that? Because they have similar motives? In that case there's a good chance Manning was affiliated with or inspired by:
Professo Noam Chomsky
Code Pink
Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers)
Iraq Veterans Against the War
Michael Moore
Queer Today
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
or
The War Resisters League...Now where is the evidence of such claims? (Or does my use of "there's a good chance" excuse me from having to back up my speculations?)
How many of those organizations consist almost entirely of servicemen?
| 186 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:53:55am |
re: #177 Obdicut
Hostile is a strong word. I'm just chagrined that so many people jumped on the defend Killgores speculations bandwagon. Could it be an irrational desire to tie everything bad in the world to "eeeevil conservatives?"
| 187 |
_RememberTonyC Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:54:14am |
This question may sound crazy, but is there anything GOOD that might come from this? I am disgusted with assange for doing this, but if our leaders are clever, they may be able to make some good things happen as a result.
What might some of those things be?
| 188 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:54:24am |
re: #185 Fozzie Bear
I'd say "Iraq Veterans Against the War", for a gimme.
| 189 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:54:26am |
re: #185 Fozzie Bear
(who have access to large numbers of classified documents)
| 190 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:54:50am |
You know what we don't know as we sit and post comments here?
We don't know what sort of day another person is having.
We don't know if they just found out their parent is terminally ill, or their kid is flunking school, or they had a fight with the spouse, or whether or not they got any sleep the night before, or just lost their job.
Some things aren't worth the drama. When I forget that (and I do), I end up regretting it.
| 191 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:55:17am |
re: #188 Obdicut
I'd say "Iraq Veterans Against the War", for a gimme.
San Francisco Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
I know lots of union laborers who are ex-service!
| 192 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:55:28am |
re: #190 reine.de.tout
You know what we don't know as we sit and post comments here?
We don't know what sort of day another person is having.
We don't know if they just found out their parent is terminally ill, or their kid is flunking school, or they had a fight with the spouse, or whether or not they got any sleep the night before, or just lost their job.
Some things aren't worth the drama. When I forget that (and I do), I end up regretting it.
Exactly right.
| 193 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:55:31am |
re: #185 Fozzie Bear
How many of those organizations consist almost entirely of servicemen?
Iraq Veterans Against the War
0_0
| 194 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:56:04am |
re: #186 DaddyG
Hostile is a strong word. I'm just chagrined that so many people jumped on the defend Killgores speculations bandwagon. Could it be an irrational desire to tie everything bad in the world to "eeevil conservatives?"
Actually, it has to do with an awareness of some of the crazy shit going on within certain groups such as the Oathkeepers. Why are you so hostikle to speculation on KT's part? Did it hit a nerve? Does it bother you that American servicemen sold us out? Is that why you feel the need to characterize the leakers as "dupes" of Wikileaks?
| 195 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:56:15am |
re: #96 venezuela lover
Excellent point Sliv_the_eli,
Rephrased, this means that the monarch's heirs have to watch out not just for their own countries enemies but enemies within their own country. Either way, the goal is to protect their butts rather than protect their country. This is not the way to run a military.
Exactly. Yet it is precisely the way many dictators do run their militaries, and have done since the dawn of recorded history.
| 196 |
sattv4u2 Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:56:35am |
And as I tried to say in #148
And on that note ,,,Off to do a bevy of errands
Ahh ,,, I just LOVE my days off!! ((grumble grumble grumble))
| 197 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:56:50am |
| 198 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:56:50am |
re: #190 reine.de.tout
You hacked my REPORT CARD!!!
...Gaaahh!
/
I WAS having a great day...............
| 199 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:57:09am |
re: #186 DaddyG
Hostile is a strong word. I'm just chagrined that so many people jumped on the defend Killgores speculations bandwagon. Could it be an irrational desire to tie everything bad in the world to "eeevil conservatives?"
Yes, that must be it. Can you please back up that speculation of yours with any sort of proof, or do you only hold others to that standard?
Seriously, dude, I don't get what's twisted your knickers so much about this. "Good chance" is an entirely subjective phrase, and it seems to have you incensed for some reason-- you're now accusing other people of jumping on a bandwagon because of hidden, conservative-smearing motives. I am understanding now that you're seeing this as a partisan thing, which I didn't understand before, but that's a surprise for me. Groups like the Oathkeepers and radical war resisters are neither left nor right; such a scale doesn't apply.
| 200 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 11:57:52am |
re: #186 DaddyG
Hostile is a strong word. I'm just chagrined that so many people jumped on the defend Killgores speculations bandwagon. Could it be an irrational desire to tie everything bad in the world to "eeevil conservatives?"
I only jumped with the dinger, but it was to defend Killgore's right to speculate openly without being jumped on to defend the very act of speculation. My post on the subject did not defend his tentative conclusion, in fact perhaps I undermined it, but I have no problem with him speculating on a connection, and I don't know why you do, unless (as speculated by others) you are offended at the suggestion itself.
| 201 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:01:16pm |
OATH KEEPERS: ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY
Click text above to read full length version.1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control.”
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
Gee, I can't comprehend why anyone would think this would be the kind of organization to directly and openly violate the chain of command. ///
| 202 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:01:34pm |
re: #194 Fozzie Bear
Actually, it has to do with an awareness of some of the crazy shit going on within certain groups such as the Oathkeepers. Why are you so hostikle to speculation on KT's part? Did it hit a nerve? Does it bother you that American servicemen sold us out? Is that why you feel the need to characterize the leakers as "dupes" of Wikileaks?
Hostile? Really?
Oh brother.
| 203 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:03:40pm |
re: #197 DaddyG
re: #192 garhighway
I admit to "drama" today.
I'm kind of a consistency nut.
:-)
We don't know what sort of day you're having, either, do we?
It was speculation. I think it may be a bit of a reach, but not out of the realm of possibility, and again, it was speculation.
I just keep thinking back to when everybody was completely pissed off with Killgore about his tea-party comments. Which ended up being very accurate.
| 204 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:03:56pm |
Oathkeepers are creepy, power fantasy obsessed children
| 205 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:04:26pm |
| 206 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:04:50pm |
| 207 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:05:00pm |
re: #205 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
I'd say that devalues the hell out of the designation 'terrorist organization', and is good way to make Assange a martyr.
| 208 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:06:47pm |
Bradley Manning was not motivated by nor has anything to do with either the Tea Party or the Oathkeepers. If you want to get an idea of his background I suggest starting with this article from the NY Times and going through many of the references at his Wiki page.
| 209 |
gamark Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:06:51pm |
re: #201 Fozzie Bear
I'm having a hard time connecting those 10 things with a motive for stealing the info heretofore released. A more likely scenario would be that Manning (assuming he is guilty) was angry at the government for the DADT policy and/or being demoted and was motivated out of simple spite.
| 210 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:06:54pm |
re: #207 Obdicut
I'd say that devalues the hell out of the designation 'terrorist organization', and is good way to make Assange a martyr.
The word "terrorist" devalues itself. It lacks any uniquely definable characteristics. We have no workable legal definition of terrorist, so things like this will happen.
| 211 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:07:34pm |
MSNBC Live Vote: Rep. Peter King has called for WikiLeaks to be designated a terrorist organization. What do you think?
i think somebody ought to buy him a dictionary
| 212 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:07:38pm |
re: #161 Todd Pearson
I speak in comments threads when I think that I have something to contribute. It is not a general hobby.
No offense, but I tend to be very suspicious of people who have had accounts a long time and don't contribute. The stalkers still have sock puppets or at least claim to have them. They're liars so one never knows. Just hope you're not one of them.
| 213 |
Walter L. Newton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:07:45pm |
re: #205 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
I think there is a good chance that they are a terrorist organization.
| 214 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:08:01pm |
re: #207 Obdicut
I'd say that devalues the hell out of the designation 'terrorist organization', and is good way to make Assange a martyr.
I'd say their acts are criminal, but I would stop short of designating them as terrorists.
| 215 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:08:31pm |
re: #213 Walter L. Newton
I think there is a good chance that they are a terrorist organization.
Ditto. I find myself in the rare position of actually agreeing with Pete King.
| 216 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:08:46pm |
re: #212 marjoriemoon
No offense, but I tend to be very suspicious of people who have had accounts a long time and don't contribute. The stalkers still have sock puppets or at least claim to have them. They're liars so one never knows. Just hope you're not one of them.
Some people just come here to read mostly. I did for quite some time before posting, so I don't think merely lurking means anything by itself.
| 217 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:08:50pm |
re: #137 Dreggas
I'm not surprised. I know how that went down WRT Kuwait. It's hard to adapt a mocking tone through text, that is mocking them for their unwillingness to do the deed.
From their POV, getting the U.S. or, better yet from the perspective of their internal politics, getting Israel to attack Iran is doing the deed.
| 218 |
avanti Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:08:54pm |
Google Earth 6 upgrade released, and very cool:
| 219 |
Reginald Perrin Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:09:08pm |
It's heartwarming to see posters defending the honor of the Oath Takers. How dare KT make such an outrageous speculation.
///
| 220 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:10:12pm |
re: #215 Gus 802
Ditto. I find myself in the rare position of actually agreeing with Pete King.
That's absurd. If disseminating information you don't want disseminated is terrorism, then the definition is so broad as to lack all meaning.
| 221 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:11:07pm |
re: #220 Fozzie Bear
That's absurd. If disseminating information you don't want disseminated is terrorism, then the definition is so broad as to lack all meaning.
Thank you for your input. My agreement stands.
| 222 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:11:27pm |
re: #219 Reginald Perrin
It's heartwarming to see posters defending the honor of the Oath Takers. How dare KT make such an outrageous speculation.
///
I'd say that's an overstatement. I didn't see anyone defend the Oathkeepers.
| 223 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:11:34pm |
When did terrorist come to mean "person who does things that I and my country don't like"?
| 224 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:11:56pm |
Terrorism - some definitions
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes
systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal
the unlawful use or threat of violence esp. against the state or the public as a politically motivated means of attack or coercion
[Link: dictionary.reference.com...]
| 225 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:12:11pm |
re: #219 Reginald Perrin
It's heartwarming to see posters defending the honor of the Oath Takers. How dare KT make such an outrageous speculation.
///
Yes. Because saying that Bradley Manning is not associated with nor was motivated by the Oathkeepers can only mean we agree with the Oathkeepers.
///
| 226 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:12:24pm |
re: #208 Gus 802
The Lamo connection is so odd-- especially Lamo turning him in. I wonder who the other 'politically motivated hackers' are.
I'd say there's still plenty about his story we don't, and won't know, until after his trial.
Didn't know he was gay, either. That explains some of the random support for him in the queer community.
| 227 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:13:22pm |
re: #223 Fozzie Bear
When did terrorist come to mean "person who does things that I and my country don't like"?
About the same time blogging disagreement became hostility.
/sorry couldn't resist.
| 228 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:13:33pm |
re: #208 Gus 802
Bradley Manning was not motivated by nor has anything to do with either the Tea Party or the Oathkeepers. If you want to get an idea of his background I suggest starting with this article from the NY Times and going through many of the references at his Wiki page.
Good stuff.
The link to wiki goes back to the NYT story.
| 229 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:13:43pm |
| 230 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:13:52pm |
re: #226 Obdicut
The Lamo connection is so odd-- especially Lamo turning him in. I wonder who the other 'politically motivated hackers' are.
I'd say there's still plenty about his story we don't, and won't know, until after his trial.
Didn't know he was gay, either. That explains some of the random support for him in the queer community.
He seems like a loner.
| 231 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:14:05pm |
re: #225 Gus 802
Yes. Because saying that Bradley Manning is not associated with nor was motivated by the Oathkeepers can only mean we agree with the Oathkeepers.
///
Yeah. That's what made me "hostile".
| 232 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:14:08pm |
re: #219 Reginald Perrin
Nobody defended them.
Manning seems like a dude with a serious rage problem and a ton of built-up resentment. I don't think it really matters where we place people like that on a scale of politics. They're anti-authority, they're out to make noise, break shit, cause trouble. That doesn't rise to the level of any sort of real, principled politics.
| 233 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:14:24pm |
re: #227 DaddyG
About the same time blogging disagreement became hostility.
/sorry couldn't resist.
Whatever you say, terrorist. /
| 234 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:14:27pm |
re: #228 researchok
Good stuff.
The link to wiki goes back to the NYT story.
Oops!
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
| 235 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:15:46pm |
re: #162 sattv4u2
Oh , and BTW
If anyone comes across a Red Eared Slider turtle, (shell) about 7 inches long X 3 inches wide, let me know
Mrs Satty took it out of it's tank and put it in the backyard yesterday so it could get some excersize, phone rang, she went and answered,,, 2 hours later remembered she let the turtle out and now it's Gonzo!
Well if he makes it down to Florida, I'll call Guiness first, and then you!
I love those turtles. We had two, Fred and Wilma. They got huge, the size of a dessert plate. We gave them to the zoo.
I'm sure he'll turn up and hopefully not in the ceiling. Keep looking!
| 236 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:16:12pm |
re: #215 Gus 802
Ditto. I find myself in the rare position of actually agreeing with Pete King.
I agree. Terror takes all forms- including undermining our efforts and in how we conduct our business- especially as it relates to national security.
| 237 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:16:14pm |
re: #216 Fozzie Bear
Some people just come here to read mostly. I did for quite some time before posting, so I don't think merely lurking means anything by itself.
I have a new theory. I suspect everyone!
| 238 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:16:30pm |
re: #233 Fozzie Bear
Whatever you say, terrorist. /
There was that time a flag came by during a parade and I was too busy picking up candy to put my hand over my heart.
(How did you know about that?)
| 239 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:17:05pm |
| 240 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:17:29pm |
re: #237 marjoriemoon
I have a new theory. I suspect everyone!
I think you get a better-than-50%-correct rate that way.
| 241 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:18:08pm |
re: #236 researchok
I agree. Terror takes all forms- including undermining our efforts and in how we conduct our business- especially as it relates to national security.
We already have words for espionage... like, say, "espionage". Terrorism isn't a catch-all for any act which undermines the US. It's a very specific thing.
| 242 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:18:31pm |
re: #226 Obdicut
Didn't know he was gay, either. That explains some of the random support for him in the queer community.
If I were them I'd be very cautious about jumping on his bandwagon. There are thousands of honorable gay soldiers who could use support to continue their distinguished careers and he is not one of them.
| 243 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:18:32pm |
re: #232 Obdicut
Nobody defended them.
Manning seems like a dude with a serious rage problem and a ton of built-up resentment. I don't think it really matters where we place people like that on a scale of politics. They're anti-authority, they're out to make noise, break shit, cause trouble. That doesn't rise to the level of any sort of real, principled politics.
And, he got what he wanted most of all- attention.
| 244 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:18:56pm |
re: #239 Obdicut
How is that 'terror'?
Who has Wikileaks committed an act of terrorism against?
Journalism. /
| 245 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:19:23pm |
re: #241 Fozzie Bear
We already have words for espionage... like, say, "espionage". Terrorism isn't a catch-all for any act which undermines the US. It's a very specific thing.
Not for long I'm afraid.
| 246 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:20:05pm |
Reading all the posts and info I can....
Seems to me there is a silver lining to this!!
There's is FAR MORE dangerous info that he could have
access to....but didn't!
His Clearance Credentials (job) obviously had limitations
to Diplomatic Cables only?
This could have been FAR worse!!
| 247 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:20:32pm |
This, right here, is why declaring war on a tactic was never a good idea. I challenge someone, anyone, to provide an official definition of terrorism that doesn't include standard military practices in times of war.
| 248 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:20:36pm |
re: #236 researchok
I agree. Terror takes all forms- including undermining our efforts and in how we conduct our business- especially as it relates to national security.
I don't know what the legal definition is for terrorism. It does make me wonder about hacking as an act of terror. Say for instance you infect a computer system with Stuxnet -- perhaps something like a water distribution system or maybe disrupting a subway line. You don't kill anyone but it does cause massive or large scale economic losses. Say it comes from a particular group that announces it's intention as being politically motivated. Would they be a terrorist group?
| 249 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:20:48pm |
re: #236 researchok
I agree. Terror takes all forms- including undermining our efforts and in how we conduct our business- especially as it relates to national security.
Would striking workers at a defense industry player such as Boeing be considered a form of terrorism?
| 250 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:21:12pm |
re: #242 DaddyG
I don't think the gay community is in a mood to be lectured on anything at the moment, given the GOP's blockage of their ability to serve openly. There's a lot of anger and resentment about that; a sharp reminder that they're second-class citizens. While Manning certainly doesn't deserve the support of any decent person, I think a lot of gay people can sympathize with the frustration and anger that he felt.
| 251 |
reginald perrin Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:21:13pm |
re: #225 Gus 802
Yes. Because saying that Bradley Manning is not associated with nor was motivated by the Oathkeepers can only mean we agree with the Oathkeepers.
///
You missed the snark tag. I wasn't implying that the posters were defending the Oath Keepers, the comment was taking a poke at those who piled on KT.
He made it clear that he was merely speculating.
| 252 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:21:27pm |
re: #239 Obdicut
How is that 'terror'?
Who has Wikileaks committed an act of terrorism against?
In leaking our private dealings with other nations- especially as it relates to Iran and Pakistan- we give those nations insight who supports our efforts and thus put nations and individuals at risk.
The subtexts here tell the story.
| 253 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:21:50pm |
re: #251 reginald perrin
You missed the snark tag. I wasn't implying that the posters were defending the Oath Keepers, the comment was taking a poke at those who piled on KT.
He made it clear that he was merely speculating.
I know. I was being sarcastic too.
| 254 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:21:54pm |
re: #241 Fozzie Bear
We already have words for espionage... like, say, "espionage". Terrorism isn't a catch-all for any act which undermines the US. It's a very specific thing.
Language is easy to cheapen. Drudge is doing to "Privacy" and "Terrorism" what Bill and Ted did it to "Excellent".
| 255 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:22:10pm |
re: #252 researchok
In leaking our private dealings with other nations- especially as it relates to Iran and Pakistan- we give those nations insight who supports our efforts and thus put nations and individuals at risk.
The subtexts here tell the story.
That's called espionage. There's already a word for it.
| 256 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:22:34pm |
re: #249 Amory Blaine
Would striking workers at a defense industry player such as Boeing be considered a form of terrorism?
No, they are acting within the confines of the law.
If they ever go outside the law and by doing so put others at risk, yes, they are engaging in a form of terror.
| 257 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:23:11pm |
re: #252 researchok
Putting people at risk is not in any way equivalent to terrorism.
Just because there's not a nice, single world to sum up why what Wikileaks is doing is dangerous, unprincipled, and foolish doesn't mean that we need to cram it into a description that doesn't fit.
I don't get the point.
| 258 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:23:20pm |
re: #248 Gus 802
The way we (U.S.) are treating terrorists...I'd rather they charged him with a hate crime!
| 259 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:23:23pm |
OK what about Climategate? Was the CRU attack a form of cyber-terrorism?
| 260 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:23:30pm |
re: #255 Fozzie Bear
That's called espionage. There's already a word for it.
Espionage occurs between governments.
What Assange did was way outside that arena.
| 261 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:23:44pm |
re: #256 researchok
No, they are acting within the confines of the law.
If they ever go outside the law and by doing so put others at risk, yes, they are engaging in a form of terror.
So if they stole information and sold it to a foreign entity, would that be terrorism?
| 262 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:24:10pm |
re: #256 researchok
No, they are acting within the confines of the law.
If they ever go outside the law and by doing so put others at risk, yes, they are engaging in a form of terror.
But shutting production down could be considered putting others at risk.
Terrorism is a goal post on wheels.
| 263 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:24:39pm |
re: #259 Gus 802
Espionage, libel, slander, and propaganda. Not 'terrorism'. Nobody was killed, threatened, or injured. Professional reputation doesn't count-- that's slander and libel.
I don't get the point of trying to call things 'terrorism' when it's a stretch.
| 264 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:25:13pm |
re: #257 Obdicut
Putting people at risk is not in any way equivalent to terrorism.
Just because there's not a nice, single world to sum up why what Wikileaks is doing is dangerous, unprincipled, and foolish doesn't mean that we need to cram it into a description that doesn't fit.
I don't get the point.
I disagree. A leaked memo that a particular person was at a meeting for example, may lead a rogue regime to initiate a murder.
A person who 'scouts' a terror site is just as guilty as person who bombs that site.
| 265 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:25:24pm |
re: #260 researchok
Espionage occurs between governments.
What Assange did was way outside that arena.
He received American state secrets and publicized them. That isn't, in itself, an act of terrorism, if you could even define terrorism. It's an act that has existed for millenia. Espionage isn't just constrained between state entities. Non-state actors can be spies.
| 266 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:25:57pm |
re: #207 Obdicut
I'd say that devalues the hell out of the designation 'terrorist organization', and is good way to make Assange a martyr.
I suspect that the desire not to make Assange a martyr is the only reason he has not already been termianted with extreme prejudice.
| 267 |
reginald perrin Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:26:18pm |
re: #253 Gus 802
I know. I was being sarcastic too.
I just noticed something, one of the participants in the pile on, just confessed to trolling other blogs while wearing sock-puppets.
| 268 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:26:29pm |
re: #263 Obdicut
Espionage, libel, slander, and propaganda. Not 'terrorism'. Nobody was killed, threatened, or injured. Professional reputation doesn't count-- that's slander and libel.
I don't get the point of trying to call things 'terrorism' when it's a stretch.
It's the new Godwin. The word "nazi" is all but used up, so we need a new "demon word". Enter "terrorism", stage right.
| 269 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:26:39pm |
re: #263 Obdicut
Espionage, libel, slander, and propaganda. Not 'terrorism'. Nobody was killed, threatened, or injured. Professional reputation doesn't count-- that's slander and libel.
I don't get the point of trying to call things 'terrorism' when it's a stretch.
Hyperbole and deminization. The terrible terrorizing twins of politics.
| 270 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:27:09pm |
re: #260 researchok
That's not true. There's corporate espionage as well. There's nothing about the word 'espionage' that makes it particular to governments. Furthermore, it's often the government spying on a civilian group. This is a civilian group spying on the government. It's certainly closer than 'terrorism'.
Now, if they intended, by the release of these documents, to cause death for Americans and destruction to American interests, if that was really the goal, death and mayhem, then sure, it's terrorism. But everything seems to indicate the goal was A) Assange to fluff his self-importance and B) embarrassing the US and sapping the US's credibility.
| 271 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:27:32pm |
re: #267 reginald perrin
I just noticed something, one of the participants in the pile on, just confessed to trolling other blogs while wearing sock-puppets.
Not me. I am a genuine in your face pain in the ass.
| 272 |
Renaissance_Man Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:27:48pm |
re: #263 Obdicut
Espionage, libel, slander, and propaganda. Not 'terrorism'. Nobody was killed, threatened, or injured. Professional reputation doesn't count-- that's slander and libel.
I don't get the point of trying to call things 'terrorism' when it's a stretch.
Because 'terrorism' is a Very Bad Word. And things we don't like a lot deserve to be associated with Very Bad Words.
That's why Julian Assange is Hitler, and Bradley Manning is a racist Nazi.
Also, socialism.
| 273 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:28:04pm |
re: #248 Gus 802
I don't know what the legal definition is for terrorism. It does make me wonder about hacking as an act of terror. Say for instance you infect a computer system with Stuxnet -- perhaps something like a water distribution system or maybe disrupting a subway line. You don't kill anyone but it does cause massive or large scale economic losses. Say it comes from a particular group that announces it's intention as being politically motivated. Would they be a terrorist group?
Yes, without a doubt, in my opinion.
If a nation bombs the power stations of another nation, that is an act of war
When you do the same via hacking, that is at the very least, terror.
| 274 |
b_sharp Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:28:16pm |
Doesn't terrorism use the fear of death, torture or other physical pain to modify behaviour? I don't think just screwing with people is the same thing.
| 275 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:28:18pm |
re: #264 researchok
I disagree. A leaked memo that a particular person was at a meeting for example, may lead a rogue regime to initiate a murder.
A person who 'scouts' a terror site is just as guilty as person who bombs that site.
But someone who takes a bunch of photos of a secure military base and uploads it to the web because 'information should be free' is not a terrorist. They didn't scout it on purpose. You're conflating action and intention.
| 276 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:28:35pm |
re: #241 Fozzie Bear
As I pointed out yesterday, Julian Assange and the other people working for Wikileaks must be held to account for their supernational effort to undermine US national security. Their actions are fully within the scope of 18 USC 794 (gathering and disseminating defense information to aid foreign government) and 18 USC 798, which relates to the disclosure of classified information.
Manning would also be subject to treason as would any other US employees working for or with wikileaks to gather and disseminate those materials.
As far as the FTO designation is concerned, FTO allows the US to block and seize assets and take further measures to stop designated groups from operating in the US. I'm not sure FTO is the proper step, but Congress and the Administration should probably take a closer look at the espionage and classified info statutes and see whether they need to be strengthened or expanded to include breaches by and for groups like wikileaks.
Now, there is an argument that wikileaks is acting in furtherance of the goals and objectives of a terrorist entity or foreign nation because they have done all the heavy lifting by obtaining and revealing the classified documents that undermine US national security and foreign policy. They're doing what those terror organizations and foreign nations could only have dreamed of accomplishing on their own - and did so without any further exposure to their own operations. All the terrorists or foreign nations have to do is access the wiki site and run through the documents on their own - and that's it (and that's no different than many of us who are now searching through the archives to find juicy tidbits). Still, that's not the same thing as being a FTO and I'm not sure that wiki falls into the definition of FTO. It would be up to Congress and then the State Department to update those lists.
| 277 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:30:13pm |
re: #214 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
I'd say their acts are criminal, but I would stop short of designating them as terrorists.
Agreed, since their actions are not primarily intended to create terror in the minds of a civilian population in order to advance their cause.
| 278 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:31:00pm |
re: #265 Fozzie Bear
He received American state secrets and publicized them. That isn't, in itself, an act of terrorism, if you could even define terrorism. It's an act that has existed for millenia. Espionage isn't just constrained between state entities. Non-state actors can be spies.
Yes, that is true- I hadn't considered that.
Still, releasing private information is one thing. That may not be a terroristic act at all (though it may be ilegal)
If However, there is a chance that information will be used to commit acts of terror, I believe you become an accomplice. In releasing this information, it would seem pretty apparent that some nations will act upon that information.
| 279 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:31:18pm |
re: #276 lawhawk
Shouldn't the beef be with the people who released the documents to WikiLeaks?
| 280 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:32:35pm |
re: #273 researchok
Yes, without a doubt, in my opinion.
If a nation bombs the power stations of another nation, that is an act of war
When you do the same via hacking, that is at the very least, terror.
No, that's sabotage, or simply just an act of war. There are already words for these things.
Once again, I challenge anyone to provide a legal definition of "terrorism" that doesn't include the military acts of any state at a time of war.
Think waaaaaaay back to 2001, pre-september. Remember, way back when words had specific meanings? Can anybody else remember that?
| 281 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:32:47pm |
Couldn't legislatures in office who advance the idea that Obama is not legitimate be considered terrorists?
| 282 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:33:13pm |
re: #275 Obdicut
But someone who takes a bunch of photos of a secure military base and uploads it to the web because 'information should be free' is not a terrorist. They didn't scout it on purpose. You're conflating action and intention.
Sometimes.
However, in releasing info on Iran, Pakistan and the Taliban for example, it is not unreasonable to believe that information might be acted upon.
National security is like that- we are required to be proactive.
| 283 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:33:43pm |
re: #281 Amory Blaine
Couldn't legislatures in office who advance the idea that Obama is not legitimate be considered terrorists?
No.
They are just stupid morons.
| 284 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:33:52pm |
re: #279 Amory Blaine
From 18 USC 798:
Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Wiki published said classified information. Whoever delivered that information is also subject to the statute. Both broke the law and both deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
| 285 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:34:07pm |
re: #276 lawhawk
Now, there is an argument that wikileaks is acting in furtherance of the goals and objectives of a terrorist entity or foreign nation because they have done all the heavy lifting by obtaining and revealing the classified documents that undermine US national security and foreign policy
- how would making these documents public further the goals of people who use violence to cause terror among americans in order to influence our behavior?
- if the goal is to undermine american security, a person might use terrorism to influence the behavior of americans, or one might undermine security more directly by exposing secret documents. the fact that both parties might - might - be working toward the same goal still does not make the tactic of terrorism the same as the tactic of exposing secret information
| 286 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:34:11pm |
re: #280 Fozzie Bear
I think y ou have to go back farther... to pre McCarthy or perhaps Alexander Hamilton.
| 287 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:35:17pm |
re: #284 lawhawk
From 18 USC 798:
Wiki published said classified information. Whoever delivered that information is also subject to the statute. Both broke the law and both deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Wikileaks is comprised entirely of foreigners, operating on soil outside the US. they aren't subject to any American statutes.
| 288 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:36:00pm |
re: #240 wrenchwench
I think you get a better-than-50%-correct rate that way.
lol I used to welcome everyone because it's always weird being the new person in any group, but basically the morons have ruined that. I suppose I shouldn't give them so much credit, but inevitably, whomever I give a warm welcome to, they turn out to be stalking, trollish, bottom-feeders.
There's no reason to have a sign on from 2009 and have no posts, but if the person is legit, he'll end up proving me wrong, I guess.
| 289 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:36:26pm |
if i wanted to use a precise, technical term to describe what assange is doing, i would call it "stirring up shit for no good reason"
| 290 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:36:31pm |
From Zdnet.
Is Wikileaks Julian Assange worse than Osama Bin Laden?
Cyberterrorism has second-level effects, meaning that the actions of cyberterrorism don’t, in and of themselves, cause damage or death. Instead, the cyberattacks create the environment where damage can occur.
Here’s a good example. Assange’s release of confidential data won’t, as part of the action itself, kill anyone. After all, all he’s doing is copying a pile of files up to a server. But, once certain people get ahold of that data, they’ll get names of confidential informants, for example, and then go hunt down and kill those people.
It’s still terrorism. It just works a little differently.
So, Assange is, essentially, a terrorist. He needs to be stopped. He needs to be treated by the allies in the same way we’d treat any other terrorist. He needs to be captured, arrested, tried, and probably jailed.
Since Assange is such a publicity hound, maybe they’ll televise the trial.
So, is Wikileaks Julian Assange worse than Osama Bin Laden? I guess that depends on how many people die based on Assange’s actions.
Yeah, the title is a little over the top.
| 291 |
b_sharp Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:37:03pm |
re: #280 Fozzie Bear
No, that's sabotage, or simply just an act of war. There are already words for these things.
Once again, I challenge anyone to provide a legal definition of "terrorism" that doesn't include the military acts of any state at a time of war.
Think waaay back to 2001, pre-september. Remember, way back when words had specific meanings? Can anybody else remember that?
You mean like when Adam and Eve were riding Dinos?
Terrorism is a process of using threat to modify behaviour. The definition has been so severely broadened it is losing all significant meaning.
| 292 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:37:22pm |
re: #282 researchok
Sure. It might be acted upon. That doesn't make revealing the information a terrorist act unless the reason you're doing it is in order for it to be acted upon. At worst, it's being okay with terrorism being a possible result of your actions while you pursue your own goal.
Again: I'm just not getting the point of shoehorning this under 'terrorism'.
| 293 |
b_sharp Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:38:15pm |
re: #282 researchok
Sometimes.
However, in releasing info on Iran, Pakistan and the Taliban for example, it is not unreasonable to believe that information might be acted upon.
National security is like that- we are required to be proactive.
We are required to never, ever, under threat of death, or Chinese water torture, use the word proactive.
| 294 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:38:34pm |
re: #247 Fozzie Bear
This, right here, is why declaring war on a tactic was never a good idea. I challenge someone, anyone, to provide an official definition of terrorism that doesn't include standard military practices in times of war.
In academic circles, terrorism is generally defined by the action being directed against or with the primary intent of sowing fear among a civilian population without a primary military purpose. It is this which distinguishes terrorism from standard military practices, which are directed against military targets or for legitimate miltary aims.
That, incidentally, is why the claim by the pro-terrorist crowd that Israel engages in "state sponsored terrorism" is patent nonsense. It is also why, whether we like it or not, the use of IED's against troops is not properly classified as terrorism.
| 295 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:38:57pm |
re: #285 engineer dog
It's using that information to target specific individuals or groups, or to adjust tactics based on the information provided in the document dump.
It's information that would be used just as someone plotting a terror attack may reconnoiter the location to be attacked. Gathering intel - and in this case, they'd be using the document dump to expand their knowledge base on the target(s).
| 296 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:39:05pm |
Criminal Organization: Set law enforcement on them.
Terrorist Organization: Set the military loose on them.
Wikileaks is a criminal organization in my book.
| 297 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:40:22pm |
re: #248 Gus 802
I don't know what the legal definition is for terrorism. It does make me wonder about hacking as an act of terror. Say for instance you infect a computer system with Stuxnet -- perhaps something like a water distribution system or maybe disrupting a subway line. You don't kill anyone but it does cause massive or large scale economic losses. Say it comes from a particular group that announces it's intention as being politically motivated. Would they be a terrorist group?
They would not, by that fact, be a terrorist "group", but their act would, within the facts your have hypothesized, be an act of terrorism.
| 298 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:40:57pm |
re: #287 Fozzie Bear
Actually, they would since 18 USC 798 does not require US citizenship. Assange and his fellow wikileakers are all unauthorized individuals as per the statute.
| 299 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:41:51pm |
The war on terror is rapidly becoming like the war on drugs: Interminable, unwinnable, ill-defined, counterproductive, and ultimately a catch-all for any actions we want to take as a country.
You cannot stop all individuals who wish to do harm to others, and do not care if they themselves survive the effort, from doing harm. It isn't possible. If the bechmark for measuring success in the "war on terror" is no more terrorist attacks, then we have defined the terms of victory in a way that would allow any single individual on the planet to deny us an end to this.
This is insanity. You can't win a thing when there is no achievable goal defined.
| 300 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:42:41pm |
re: #296 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Criminal Organization: Set law enforcement on them.
Terrorist Organization: Set the military loose on them.Wikileaks is a criminal organization in my book.
Espionage Organization: Set the spooks loose on 'em.
| 302 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:43:26pm |
re: #280 Fozzie Bear
No, that's sabotage, or simply just an act of war. There are already words for these things.
Once again, I challenge anyone to provide a legal definition of "terrorism" that doesn't include the military acts of any state at a time of war.
Think waaay back to 2001, pre-september. Remember, way back when words had specific meanings? Can anybody else remember that?
Let's use the Israelis and Palestinians as examples.
“Terrorism” is a description of a means, a method of deliberately attacking or threatening to attack civilian targets in order to achieve political goals.
“Freedom fighting” is a description of an end, as a freedom fighter’s goal is national liberation.
An individual could participate in “terrorism” and “freedom fighting” simultaneously, because one word describes means, while the other describes ends. To say that a Palestinian suicide bomber is not condemnable as a terrorist because the bomber’s cause is national liberation is to argue that the end justifies the means.
Terror is not just about guns and bombs. Terror can be disrupting power supplies, banking, just about anything that puts a nation or certain individuals at risk. That applies to religious minorities, ethnic groups, lifestyle groups, and even political groups, etc.
One could argue the Palestinians are in a state of war, but that would be false. The war ended in 1967.
There are Kurds who commit acts of terror in Turkey- and they are not at war.
There are the Flemish and Walloons in Belgium.
There are the Basques in Spain and France
There are lots of example of terrorism in the absence of war.
| 303 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:43:26pm |
re: #256 researchok
No, they are acting within the confines of the law.
If they ever go outside the law and by doing so put others at risk, yes, they are engaging in a form of terror.
I have to respectfully disagree on that one. Going outside the law and putting others at risk might be a criminal act, but is not necessarily an act of terrorism. See #294, above.
| 304 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:44:24pm |
re: #293 b_sharp
We are required to never, ever, under threat of death, or Chinese water torture, use the word proactive.
Line of the day.
| 305 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:44:56pm |
re: #298 lawhawk
Actually, they would since 18 USC 798 does not require US citizenship. Assange and his fellow wikileakers are all unauthorized individuals as per the statute.
Yeah, except it's an American statute, so no, it doesn't apply. There might be an international law, and local powers might agree to extradition, but no, we don't get to make laws that apply to the whole planet.
It has recently come to my attention that you have questioned the actions of the Iranian government. Please report to Tehran and turn yourself in for summary execution, as you are in violation of the laws of Iran.
| 306 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:45:06pm |
re: #298 lawhawk
Which implies..as long as they are NOT on American soil...
?
If they land here their ass is ours??
..pending Indictments?
| 307 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:45:09pm |
This is from FEMA (re cyberterrorism):
“unlawful attacks and threats of attack against computers, networks, and the information stored therein when done to intimidate or coerce a government or its people in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
| 308 |
b_sharp Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:45:15pm |
re: #288 marjoriemoon
lol I used to welcome everyone because it's always weird being the new person in any group, but basically the morons have ruined that. I suppose I shouldn't give them so much credit, but inevitably, whomever I give a warm welcome to, they turn out to be stalking, trollish, bottom-feeders.
There's no reason to have a sign on from 2009 and have no posts, but if the person is legit, he'll end up proving me wrong, I guess.
Funny thing, all the morons that ruined it came after B_Sharp and Obdicut.
I think there is some significance in that. I'd check into them if I were you.
| 309 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:46:05pm |
I'm sitting here thinking that there could be a category for terrorist support organizations.
There are organizastions here in the US that raise money for terrorist organizations, that recruit, train, pass information, but do not actively pull the trigger/detonator.
However, I sense that this is a designation that would be much abused for political reasons.
| 310 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:46:47pm |
re: #305 Fozzie Bear
Yes, and there is extradition, and given how this has upset more than a few nations - they may be more than willing to hand him and the rest over to the US for prosecution.
| 311 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:46:58pm |
re: #307 Gus 802
This wasn't an attack or a threat of an attack on the information, though. Nothing was destroyed by their actions.
It is also really unclear that they were trying to intimidate or coerce the US into doing anything. What were they trying to intimidate the US into doing, in your view?
| 312 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:47:23pm |
re: #292 Obdicut
Sure. It might be acted upon. That doesn't make revealing the information a terrorist act unless the reason you're doing it is in order for it to be acted upon. At worst, it's being okay with terrorism being a possible result of your actions while you pursue your own goal.
Again: I'm just not getting the point of shoehorning this under 'terrorism'.
I think I'm being expedient.
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
I would ask Lawhawk what 'Terroristic Threats' really means.
| 314 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:47:46pm |
re: #287 Fozzie Bear
Wikileaks is comprised entirely of foreigners, operating on soil outside the US. they aren't subject to any American statutes.
Careful, there, Fozzie. The same could be said of enemy combatants who, whilst not in the uniform of a sovereign state, commit acts of violence against U.S. troops and then claim to be entitled to the protection of the U.S. Constitution once they are captured.
| 315 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:48:11pm |
re: #312 researchok
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
Really? So, people putting out propaganda and lies about AGW are terrorists?
| 316 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:49:28pm |
re: #310 lawhawk
So we can foot the bill again!!!
Fuck'em...Let the Saudis have 'em!!
| 317 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:49:57pm |
re: #303 sliv_the_eli
I have to respectfully disagree on that one. Going outside the law and putting others at risk might be a criminal act, but is not necessarily an act of terrorism. See #294, above.
Point taken.
See my 302
| 318 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:50:00pm |
re: #311 Obdicut
This wasn't an attack or a threat of an attack on the information, though. Nothing was destroyed by their actions.
It is also really unclear that they were trying to intimidate or coerce the US into doing anything. What were they trying to intimidate the US into doing, in your view?
I don't know exactly but some one must have asked that question before. According to Daniel Ellsberg while being interviewed by Amy Goodman one of the goals as he sees it is to pull out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. This would interfere with the war on terror would it not?
| 319 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:50:00pm |
re: #307 Gus 802
This is from FEMA (re cyberterrorism):
“unlawful attacks and threats of attack against computers, networks, and the information stored therein when done to intimidate or coerce a government or its people in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
So we are now in the business of guessing motivations, rather than punishing actions? We are fucked. This isn't the way you run law enforcement agencies effectively, it is no way to define a crime, and it isn't terribly helpful for combating non-state actors, either.
I feel like I am in the twilight zone. Let's just give everything we don't like that has been going on forever, and give these things new names, so we can pretend that thousands of years of history just don't apply. "This is all new" we can say to ourselves and each other, so we don't have to think too hard about what it is we are doing.
| 320 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:50:18pm |
re: #314 sliv_the_eli
That could never happe.....
Oh...Wait!
/
| 321 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:50:23pm |
How about this?
We have a spy intercept Juilan's dry cleaning and plant some metallic threads in his jacket lining so the next time he walks through a full body scanner the picture spells out "Property of the CIA".
| 322 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:51:06pm |
re: #319 Fozzie Bear
So we are now in the business of guessing motivations, rather than punishing actions? We are fucked. This isn't the way you run law enforcement agencies effectively, it is no way to define a crime, and it isn't terribly helpful for combating non-state actors, either.
I feel like I am in the twilight zone. Let's just give everything we don't like that has been going on forever, and give these things new names, so we can pretend that thousands of years of history just don't apply. "This is all new" we can say to ourselves and each other, so we don't have to think too hard about what it is we are doing.
That's just a definition from FEMA (DHS?) and not really a law or statute.
| 323 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:52:17pm |
re: #321 DaddyG
How about this?
We have a spy intercept Juilan's dry cleaning and plant some metallic threads in his jacket lining so the next time he walks through a full body scanner the picture spells out "Property of the CIA".
Best idea of the day.
| 324 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:52:20pm |
re: #306 reloadingisnotahobby
Which implies..as long as they are NOT on American soil...
?
If they land here their ass is ours??
..pending Indictments?
Long standing decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court allow those who have violated our criminal laws to be brought within our jurisdiction by any means. The courts will not question how they came to be within the jursidcition.
| 325 |
researchok Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:52:39pm |
re: #315 Obdicut
Really? So, people putting out propaganda and lies about AGW are terrorists?
No at all. That is protected free speech.
An act that incites the murder of a gay person, however, is an act of terror in my opinion.
I believe it is reasonable to believe the release of these documents does endanger lives.
That isn't my belief only- Hillary Clinton and whole lot of others see no ambiguity in the potential dangers.
| 326 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:53:21pm |
re: #314 sliv_the_eli
Careful, there, Fozzie. The same could be said of enemy combatants who, whilst not in the uniform of a sovereign state, commit acts of violence against U.S. troops and then claim to be entitled to the protection of the U.S. Constitution once they are captured.
Hence the abject stupidity of the designation of "enemy combatant" rather than "POW" or "alleged criminal". POW's have a pesky expectation that they can't be tortured. The same applies to suspected criminals.
So, lets just start making shit up and that way lawyers can tell us it's totally cool to do the exact same thing that would be considered illegal if we used the old words to describe it.
It's not torture! Heavens no! We would never do that. We simply engaged in enhanced interrogation
| 327 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:53:23pm |
re: #318 Gus 802
I think that's a large part of the problem here: Wikileaks is partially a Wiki-- less so now, but it's a collaborative project with a lot of different people who may all have quite different agendas. That's why Killgore's Oath Keeper speculation doesn't bother me in the least; this is the kind of thing where you can have black-hat anarchists working with black-helicopter-fearing militia members, etc. etc. What are we defining as "Wikileaks", anyway?
| 328 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:53:23pm |
re: #324 sliv_the_eli
Long standing decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court allow those who have violated our criminal laws to be brought within our jurisdiction by any means. The courts will not question how they came to be within the jursidcition.
Call up Dog the Bounty Hunter.
/
| 329 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:53:31pm |
re: #309 EmmmieG
I'm sitting here thinking that there could be a category for terrorist support organizations.
There are organizastions here in the US that raise money for terrorist organizations, that recruit, train, pass information, but do not actively pull the trigger/detonator.
However, I sense that this is a designation that would be much abused for political reasons.
Which is why it is a crime to provide material support to a terrorist organization.
| 330 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:53:48pm |
re: #295 lawhawk
It's using that information to target specific individuals or groups, or to adjust tactics based on the information provided in the document dump.
It's information that would be used just as someone plotting a terror attack may reconnoiter the location to be attacked. Gathering intel - and in this case, they'd be using the document dump to expand their knowledge base on the target(s).
the information is all about frank, and often rather rude, assessments that american diplomats and national leaders are making about each other
how could it be used practically in furtherance of the goals that you state above?
| 331 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:54:12pm |
re: #327 Obdicut
I think that's a large part of the problem here: Wikileaks is partially a Wiki-- less so now, but it's a collaborative project with a lot of different people who may all have quite different agendas. That's why Killgore's Oath Keeper speculation doesn't bother me in the least; this is the kind of thing where you can have black-hat anarchists working with black-helicopter-fearing militia members, etc. etc. What are we defining as "Wikileaks", anyway?
Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, et al.
| 333 |
celticdragon Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:54:52pm |
re: #25 Shiplord Kirel
If the Saudis think this is such a great idea, why don't they do it themselves. SA has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on armaments in the past 50 years, much of it on warplanes and missiles that are fully capable of hitting Iran.
Royal Saudi Air Force
Note that there are more than 70 F-15S Strike Eagles and the Saudis have asked for 72 more. They also have 80+ Tornado Strike variants, a fleet of tankers, AWACS aircraft, and a fearsome array of missiles.
What are they waiting for?
Public opinion...that's what.
| 334 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:54:57pm |
re: #312 researchok
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
So a guy at Jiffy Lube that fails to properly tighten the lug nuts on a minivan's wheels is a terrorist? He puts individuals or groups at risk.
| 335 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:55:15pm |
re: #290 Gus 802
From Zdnet.
Is Wikileaks Julian Assange worse than Osama Bin Laden?
Yeah, the title is a little over the top.
Assange's actions haven't led to any deaths. Yet. If the question is, "Is terrorism worse than treason?" I can't answer that. They both are very dangerous in different ways.
Anyway, they both are illegal. I'm guessing, if caught, Assange will get a military trial. He'll suffer twice as much in a military prison.
| 336 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:55:23pm |
re: #312 researchok
I think I'm being expedient.
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
I would ask Lawhawk what 'Terroristic Threats' really means.
"Terroristic threats" is a specifically defined crime that refers to threats of violence against an individual, not terrorism as we have been discussing the subject.
| 337 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:55:45pm |
re: #328 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Call up Dog the Bounty Hunter.
/
Only if he promises to try and BLEND in !!
Never happen..........
| 338 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:55:53pm |
re: #325 researchok
No at all. That is protected free speech.
Why? Your criteria just a second ago was:
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
Creating and distributing propaganda to misinform the public on the subject of AGW is an act that puts the nation, individuals, and groups at risk.
You also say:
I believe it is reasonable to believe the release of these documents does endanger lives.
It is overwhelming reasonable to believe that inaction on AGW endangers lives.
I am not saying we should consider AGW deniers terrorists. I am pointing out the problem with overbroad criteria.
| 339 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:56:51pm |
What WL does is terrorism as much as Obama is a Communist and Bush is Hitler.
| 340 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:56:54pm |
re: #335 marjoriemoon
Assange's actions haven't led to any deaths. Yet. If the question is, "Is terrorism worse than treason?" I can't answer that. They both are very dangerous in different ways.
Anyway, they both are illegal. I'm guessing, if caught, Assange will get a military trial. He'll suffer twice as much in a military prison.
We'll find out when Holder and justice comes up with charges. Today, Holder announced that there is an investigation underway.
| 341 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:57:11pm |
re: #338 Obdicut
I am not saying we should consider AGW deniers terrorists.
Tell that to the polar bears. /
| 342 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:57:12pm |
You all need to read Kafka's "The Trial", immediately. Seriously.
The definition of "terrorist" is at best an extremely mushy one, and there are good reasons it is designated as such.
| 343 |
recusancy Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:57:23pm |
re: #312 researchok
I think I'm being expedient.
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
I would ask Lawhawk what 'Terroristic Threats' really means.
Terror is meant to instill fear and wreak havoc beyond the actual act of terror itself. See: America, 21st Century.
| 344 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:57:27pm |
re: #331 Gus 802
Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, et al.
And that's my point. Without knowing the 'et al', we can't possibly know their motivations. And without knowing their motivations, we can't know if this is a group that even has a shared ideology.
| 345 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:57:34pm |
re: #334 garhighway
So a guy at Jiffy Lube that fails to properly tighten the lug nuts on a minivan's wheels is a terrorist? He puts individuals or groups at risk.
exactly
don't forget that the word "terrorism" includes the word "terror". terrorism is the use of terror to influence behavior. if there is no terror, it isn't terrorism
| 346 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:57:51pm |
re: #293 b_sharp
We are required to never, ever, under threat of death, or Chinese water torture, use the word proactive.
Other words and phrases that should result in instant death (acronyms inferred):
at this time
leverage (if used as a verb)
impact (if used as a verb)
rightsize (if used at all)
issue (when you mean PROBLEM)
challenge (when you mean PROBLEM)
opportunity (when you mean PROBLEM)
[anything] on steroids
[anything] from hell
key performance indicators
extra value
end of business day
drink the kool-aid
walk it back
eat their own dog food
uncountable others, but if you ever say any of those, the only way you can redeem yourself is to commit spectacularly gory suicide in public.
| 347 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:58:29pm |
re: #317 researchok
I generally agree with your 302, but disagree with the specific example of Palestinian suicide bombers. They are only engaged in a war of liberation if one agrees with their concept that the 60+ years old effort to "liberate" Israel from Jewish control is a war of liberation.
| 348 |
Renaissance_Man Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:58:34pm |
re: #312 researchok
I do believe that any act that puts the nation or individuals or groups at risk are acts of terror.
So every time you speed, you're a... terrorist?
Every time you let your kid climb a tree, you're a... terrorist?
| 349 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:59:50pm |
re: #348 Renaissance_Man
So every time you speed, you're a... terrorist?
Every time you let your kid climb a tree, you're a... terrorist?
Every time your kid climbs a tree the terrorists win.
| 350 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 12:59:52pm |
re: #299 Fozzie Bear
The war on terror is rapidly becoming like the war on drugs: Interminable, unwinnable, ill-defined, counterproductive, and ultimately a catch-all for any actions we want to take as a country.
You cannot stop all individuals who wish to do harm to others, and do not care if they themselves survive the effort, from doing harm. It isn't possible. If the bechmark for measuring success in the "war on terror" is no more terrorist attacks, then we have defined the terms of victory in a way that would allow any single individual on the planet to deny us an end to this.
This is insanity. You can't win a thing when there is no achievable goal defined.
But isn't that the bottom line of all American law? Innocent till proven guilty? We don't put people in jail until they actually do harm to others. Treason is doing harm to others.
There is a goal. Prevent people from killing others (as to terrorism). Isn't that what the new TSA procedures are all about?
| 351 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:00:12pm |
re: #346 negativ
Other words and phrases that should result in instant death (acronyms inferred):
at this time
leverage (if used as a verb)
impact (if used as a verb)
rightsize (if used at all)
issue (when you mean PROBLEM)
challenge (when you mean PROBLEM)
opportunity (when you mean PROBLEM)
[anything] on steroids
[anything] from hell
key performance indicators
extra value
end of business day
drink the kool-aid
walk it back
eat their own dog fooduncountable others, but if you ever say any of those, the only way you can redeem yourself is to commit spectacularly gory suicide in public.
That is an out of the box paradigm.
/
| 352 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:00:18pm |
re: #322 Gus 802
That's just a definition from FEMA (DHS?) and not really a law or statute.
Have you ever tried to explain to a government bureaucrat that his/her/its definition is not the law?
| 353 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:01:56pm |
re: #352 sliv_the_eli
Have you ever tried to explain to a government bureaucrat that his/her/its definition is not the law?
Constantly. But part of my job is continuous process improvement in state government services.
| 354 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:02:37pm |
re: #332 recusancy
Let em talk. It won't get passed the Senate and sure as hell won't get passed the President (repealing Roe v Wade). We're safe for another couple years, at least.
| 355 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:02:38pm |
Here:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2331
§ 2331. Definitions
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
Notice the line: involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life. Looks to me is all they would have to do is prove that Assange was engaged in "acts dangerous to human life". Let it be noted that AG Holder and Admiral Mullin have both repeated on several occasions that Assange's acts where potentially dangerous to human lives (i.e. solders, foreign service personnel, etc.).
| 356 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:02:56pm |
re: #346 negativ
I think you should walk it back at this time until we can leverage the issue. At the end of the business day, I think posters will be able to rise to the opportunity if they haven't drunk the koolaid to rinse the taste of eating their own dog food. The impact will have a lot of extra value and allow us all to rightsize the most from the end prodcut.
| 357 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:03:28pm |
re: #334 garhighway
So a guy at Jiffy Lube that fails to properly tighten the lug nuts on a minivan's wheels is a terrorist? He puts individuals or groups at risk.
You've been to my mechanic I see...
| 358 |
lawhawk Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:03:37pm |
Terrorism has a specific definition for US law: 18 USC 2331.
Providing material assistance to terrorist organizations has a specific definition.
Prove 'em, and you've made your case against WL and Assange...
| 359 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:03:57pm |
re: #339 Sergey Romanov
What WL does is terrorism as much as Obama is a Communist and Bush is Hitler.
So, you agree that Assange is a terrorist?
//
| 360 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:04:39pm |
re: #355 Gus 802
Can you explain why you want to call it terrorism, rather than espionage?
| 361 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:04:48pm |
re: #359 sliv_the_eli
I agree that there is a lot of unhingedness going on right here and now.
| 362 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:05:01pm |
re: #355 Gus 802
Here:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2331
§ 2331. DefinitionsNotice the line: involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life. Looks to me is all they would have to do is prove that Assange was engaged in "acts dangerous to human life". Let it be noted that AG Holder and Admiral Mullin have both repeated on several occasions that Assange's acts where potentially dangerous to human lives (i.e. solders, foreign service personnel, etc.).
That definition also would mean that a very large number of other criminal acts would be terrorist in nature.
It is so broad as to not have meaning.
| 363 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:05:05pm |
re: #341 DaddyG
Tell that to the polar bears. /
What do fat people taking a dip at Coney Island beach have to do with terrorism? I mean, other than that some of them should not wear Speedos?
| 364 |
Renaissance_Man Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:06:23pm |
re: #339 Sergey Romanov
What WL does is terrorism as much as Obama is a Communist and Bush is Hitler.
See, this is the problem. Barney Frank is the Communist. Obama is Hitler. Bush is just a RINO.
You're from Russia, so you can be forgiven for not knowing the intricacies of American politics.
| 365 |
reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:06:25pm |
So .....It appears we all have our own definition of
Terrorist..
Saboteur...
Hacker ...
Traitor...etc..
We've come full circle
All the back to ASSHOLIO!!
Which fits the best best but is not an Indictable Charge!!
/
| 366 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:06:25pm |
re: #362 Fozzie Bear
That definition also would mean that a very large number of other criminal acts would be terrorist in nature.
It is so broad as to not have meaning.
It's not that broad:
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Clearly Assange is engaged in line "ii".
| 367 |
Ojoe Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:06:32pm |
Every day that we don't attack Iran's nuclear program, they enrich more uranium & they'll use a bomb as soon as they can build one.
I do not understand why we haven't gone after them with force before now.
The civilized world is deluding itself, just like it did regarding Germany in the 1930s.
| 368 |
recusancy Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:06:39pm |
re: #354 marjoriemoon
Let em talk. It won't get passed the Senate and sure as hell won't get passed the President (repealing Roe v Wade). We're safe for another couple years, at least.
I'd prefer our officials not write policy with domestic terrorist's assistance. I seem to remember a recent president coming under fire for having the gaul to work for the same employer as one.
| 369 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:06:42pm |
re: #345 engineer dog
exactly
don't forget that the word "terrorism" includes the word "terror". terrorism is the use of terror to influence behavior. if there is no terror, it isn't terrorism
The problem with your definition is that it requires an act to be successful in sowing terror in order to be considered terrorism. The real distinction is in the purpose of the act.
| 370 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:07:26pm |
re: #366 Gus 802
But what's he trying to do? Is he saying that if the US doesn't stop doing X, he'll release more? How is there coercion and intimidation at work here?
| 371 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:07:29pm |
re: #360 Obdicut
Can you explain why you want to call it terrorism, rather than espionage?
It's just a thought. Whatever it takes. I'm sure if they do file charges they'll take the easiest route to a conviction. Terrorist charges would be a long shot.
| 372 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:07:56pm |
re: #354 marjoriemoon
Let em talk. It won't get passed the Senate and sure as hell won't get
passedthe President (repealing Roe v Wade). We're safe for another couple years, at least.
PAST. Eeek Sorry.
| 373 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:08:05pm |
re: #370 Obdicut
But what's he trying to do? Is he saying that if the US doesn't stop doing X, he'll release more? How is there coercion and intimidation at work here?
Well, he already attempted to "negotiate" with the US government.
| 374 |
celticdragon Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:08:32pm |
re: #299 Fozzie Bear
The war on terror is rapidly becoming like the war on drugs: Interminable, unwinnable, ill-defined, counterproductive, and ultimately a catch-all for any actions we want to take as a country.
You cannot stop all individuals who wish to do harm to others, and do not care if they themselves survive the effort, from doing harm. It isn't possible. If the bechmark for measuring success in the "war on terror" is no more terrorist attacks, then we have defined the terms of victory in a way that would allow any single individual on the planet to deny us an end to this.
This is insanity. You can't win a thing when there is no achievable goal defined.
This.
Exactly why we will see pat downs and scanners at bus terminals, train stations and marinas, and ever increasing government intrusion into our private and public affairs. There will always be another "terror threat" to justify government anything that the alphabet agencies and their sweetheart deal-corporate whores want.
| 375 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:08:34pm |
re: #353 DaddyG
It's good to have a job for which there is always a demand because the desired end result can never be achieved.
| 376 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:08:45pm |
re: #371 Gus 802
The rationale 'whatever it takes' is an extremely poor one for me. It has huge, huge potential for setting terrible precedent.
| 377 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:08:45pm |
what the latest wikileaks did was to embarrass a lot of people, and cause the channels of american diplomatic communication to suddenly become completely insecure.
that's bad enough. trying to make it into 'terrorism' is a pointless exercise
| 378 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:09:04pm |
re: #362 Fozzie Bear
That definition also would mean that a very large number of other criminal acts would be terrorist in nature.
It is so broad as to not have meaning.
Plus you have to meet the part (B) element of the statute, which I don't think is met here, in that the leaks were not coercive or threatening in nature.
I get that what WL did is really bad, but we devalue the term terrorism by trying to make it fit here.
| 379 |
Buck Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:09:06pm |
Was revealing Israel's nuclear secrets to the world by Morechai Vanunu the same thing?
| 380 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:09:10pm |
re: #364 Renaissance_Man
See, this is the problem. Barney Frank is the Communist. Obama is Hitler. Bush is just a RINO.
You're from Russia, so you can be forgiven for not knowing the intricacies of American politics.
Uh, no. Wingnuts: Obama is a Commie. Moonbats: Bush is Hitler. The (hopefully temporarily) unhinged: WL is a terrorist org.
| 381 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:09:29pm |
re: #366 Gus 802
It's not that broad:
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; andClearly Assange is engaged in line "ii".
How is that clear? That is anything BUT clear. Simply opposing the government of the US, and publishing state secrets doesn't make him anything other than engaged in espionage, at worst. Is there any actual reason to believe that he is attempting to intimidate or coerce anyone?
Jesus, I feel like words just mean whatever the hell people mean them to mean, lately.
| 382 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:09:38pm |
re: #358 lawhawk
Terrorism has a specific definition for US law: 18 USC 2331.
Providing material assistance to terrorist organizations has a specific definition.
Prove 'em, and you've made your case against WL and Assange...
I upding you as a positive affirmation for catching the lot of them!
| 383 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:10:27pm |
re: #373 Gus 802
Well, he already attempted to "negotiate" with the US government.
I'm sorry, I missed that. Are you talking about the offer to work with them on redacting stuff? Not that for a minute I think that was an honest or sincere offer, but again, what is he trying to get the US government to do, and where is the coercion and intimidation?
I have seen nothing to indicate that he would stop the leaks under any circumstances.
| 384 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:10:33pm |
re: #369 sliv_the_eli
The problem with your definition is that it requires an act to be successful in sowing terror in order to be considered terrorism. The real distinction is in the purpose of the act.
no - i agree with you that the purpose is the real distinction. there have been terrorist acts that failed to cause terror
| 385 |
iossarian Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:10:56pm |
re: #370 Obdicut
I'm thinking pretty hard about Assange and Wikileaks, and at the moment I think that he/it is overall a bad thing, but a bad thing that has been brought into being by the complete failure of the press in the US to hold the government to any kind of accountability over the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts.
Which I think ties in to the "what does he want to accomplish" question - I don't think he actually wants to accomplish anything other than making public information that he feels needs to be public (of course, one can disagree with that judgement).
| 386 |
Shiplord Kirel Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:11:08pm |
Assange is a real-life Blofeld in that he has found a way to simultaneously blackmail every government and large organization in the world if he so chooses. I don't know if he is doing this, or intends to, but as things stand he has it within his power. We've seen that he likes being "Number 1," though.
| 387 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:11:46pm |
re: #375 sliv_the_eli
It's good to have a job for which there is always a demand because the desired end result can never be achieved.
Much like anyone charged with prosecuting the war on terror.
| 388 |
RadicalModerate Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:12:04pm |
re: #332 recusancy
- and Republicans complain about Obama appeasing terrorism when their upcoming speaker meets with the guy whose organization provided safe haven for Eric Rudolph, who was on the FBI's ten most-wanted list for domestic terrorism (Olympic Park, abortion clinic, gay/lesbian establishment bombings?)
| 389 |
celticdragon Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:12:06pm |
| 390 |
recusancy Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:12:16pm |
re: #366 Gus 802
It's not that broad:
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; andClearly Assange is engaged in line "ii".
Fox News has (i) covered.
Jihadis have (iii) covered.
It's the trifecta.
| 391 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:12:17pm |
re: #384 engineer dog
Fair enough. Perhaps I read your wording too closely.
| 392 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:12:32pm |
re: #383 Obdicut
I'm sorry, I missed that. Are you talking about the offer to work with them on redacting stuff? Not that for a minute I think that was an honest or sincere offer, but again, what is he trying to get the US government to do, and where is the coercion and intimidation?
I have seen nothing to indicate that he would stop the leaks under any circumstances.
I don't know the specifics offhand but it was mentioned in the Koh letter.
The Obama administration, Mr Koh wrote, would "not engage in a negotiation regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained US Government classified materials".
| 393 |
sliv_the_eli Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:13:23pm |
re: #387 Fozzie Bear
Much like anyone charged with prosecuting the war on terror.
It often feels like the same thing.
//
| 394 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:13:33pm |
re: #381 Fozzie Bear
Jesus, I feel like words just mean whatever the hell people mean them to mean, lately.
the destruction of the dictionary is one of the main tactics of the gop
did you see last week where i challenged my wingnut correspondents - who, naturally, were throwing the word 'socialist' around with wild abandon - to define it?
they responded with heartfelt essays declaring that any actual definitions would be obnoxious and socialist
| 395 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:13:44pm |
| 396 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:13:59pm |
re: #368 recusancy
I'd prefer our officials not write policy with domestic terrorist's assistance. I seem to remember a recent president coming under fire for having the gaul to work for the same employer as one.
I might have waved that off too quickly. You're absolutely right. Boner meeting with Bonehead is horrific. But at least they won't get to do much damage.
Btw, my husband has taken to saying things to me like, "I have a raging Speaker of the House for you!" LOL
Marry a silly man, ladies. You'll never go wrong.
| 397 |
celticdragon Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:14:54pm |
re: #368 recusancy
I'd prefer our officials not write policy with domestic terrorist's assistance. I seem to remember a recent president coming under fire for having the
gaulgall to work for the same employer as one.
I can't think of any US leaders who possessed Iron Age Celts from Central and Southern Europe.
| 398 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:15:08pm |
re: #380 Sergey Romanov
Uh, no. Wingnuts: Obama is a Commie. Moonbats: Bush is Hitler. The (hopefully temporarily) unhinged: WL is a terrorist org.
Yes. We should all adhere to a strict narrative here and especially one that you find to your liking. What's you email so we can discuss what we can or cannot discuss in LGF.
| 399 |
celticdragon Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:15:45pm |
re: #396 marjoriemoon
I might have waved that off too quickly. You're absolutely right. Boner meeting with Bonehead is horrific. But at least they won't get to do much damage.
Btw, my husband has taken to saying things to me like, "I have a raging Speaker of the House for you!" LOL
Marry a silly man, ladies. You'll never go wrong.
That wins the internets for today! :D
| 400 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:16:01pm |
re: #398 Gus 802
Yes. We should all adhere to a strict narrative here and especially one that you find to your liking. What's you email so we can discuss what we can or cannot discuss in LGF.
Excuse me, who are you quoting? Not me, that's for sure.
| 401 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:16:47pm |
re: #388 RadicalModerate FYI- It was a meeting with his Chief of Staff not Boehner himself.
| 402 |
recusancy Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:16:54pm |
re: #398 Gus 802
Yes. We should all adhere to a strict narrative here and especially one that you find to your liking. What's you email so we can discuss what we can or cannot discuss in LGF.
Lighten up.
| 404 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:17:19pm |
re: #351 DaddyG
That is an out of the box paradigm.
The most annoying goddamned thing in the world is a Pointy Haired Boss who expects you to Think Outside the Box in order to come up with Out-of-the-Box Solutions.
The Suicide Hotline has a special code you can dial if you are a "developer" who creates "end-user experience."
Note: The following were not deleted scenes from "Office Space"
OH! And, uhhh... next Friday is Hawaiian Shirt Day. So, go ahead and wear a Hawaiian shirtm and jeans. If you want.
| 405 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:17:23pm |
re: #403 Gus 802
Heh.
| 406 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:17:48pm |
re: #392 Gus 802
I think that was in reference to Assange offering to work with the US to redact stuff before the release, not to attempt to demand changes in US policy to prevent more releases. I don't know.
But you get my point. There's plenty of other shit to call him, plenty of other crap to throw at him. Call this terrorism and you set a dangerous precedent, and I don't see any benefit at all from doing so.
| 407 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:19:12pm |
re: #403 Gus 802
Gaze
Sergey is in no way, absolutely not, in any sense, by any measure, a troll.
He is highly concerned with semantic meaning, which is a side-effect of doing a lot of work against holocaust revisionism.
| 408 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:19:14pm |
re: #406 Obdicut
I think that was in reference to Assange offering to work with the US to redact stuff before the release, not to attempt to demand changes in US policy to prevent more releases. I don't know.
But you get my point. There's plenty of other shit to call him, plenty of other crap to throw at him. Call this terrorism and you set a dangerous precedent, and I don't see any benefit at all from doing so.
That works.
| 409 |
Gus Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:19:59pm |
re: #407 Obdicut
Sergey is in no way, absolutely not, in any sense, by any measure, a troll.
He is highly concerned with semantic meaning, which is a side-effect of doing a lot of work against holocaust revisionism.
I didn't mean to say he was a troll. It's just a personality thing.
Anyway, I'm going to split. Back later, maybe.
| 410 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:20:30pm |
You all are are pentifricating my obstentiouslessness.
Fuck language, I say. We don't need words to mean things, lets just use them as slightly advanced grunts to express displeasure. Who needs meaning, when we have so much authentic feeling to go around. I refudiate the need for agreed-upon definitions. That's such a commie thing to do, anyway. I prefer FREEEEEDOM.
| 411 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:20:30pm |
re: #288 marjoriemoon
lol I used to welcome everyone because it's always weird being the new person in any group, but basically the morons have ruined that. I suppose I shouldn't give them so much credit, but inevitably, whomever I give a warm welcome to, they turn out to be stalking, trollish, bottom-feeders.
There's no reason to have a sign on from 2009 and have no posts, but if the person is legit, he'll end up proving me wrong, I guess.
Hi Marjorie,
I lurked for ages, still do most of the time.
I am fascinated by US/World politics, however, I am not intimately knowledgeable about any aspect of it.
For me, LGF is a great blog, where many views can be expressed and argued.
So many posters have a depth of knowledge within specific fields, its an education and a privilege to read or post here.
Please let me encourage you, give posters a chance, if they are trolls it will say more about them then it does about you.
| 412 |
RadicalModerate Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:21:14pm |
re: #401 DaddyG
FYI- It was a meeting with his Chief of Staff not Boehner himself.
The only staff member of Boehner who should be meeting with Randall Terry is his security detail to escort the racist domestic-terrorism supporter out of the building.
| 413 |
Walter L. Newton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:22:40pm |
| 414 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:23:33pm |
re: #413 Walter L. Newton
No, because, contrary to #398 I don't dictate anything to anyone.
| 415 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:27:07pm |
Propaganda is defined as the use of media to elicit a desired act on the part of the intended audience of the media.
I think it would be best to point out here that one of the most powerful propaganda techniques available is the process of turning a word from a vessel bearing a specific meaning, to a symbol bearing a certain emotional impact. It simply takes repetition of a term in a context that would carry a certain emotional impact the the audience. It doesn't take long before the meaning is replaced with emotion. This has in large part been done to the word "terrorist" among other terms. It can happen with things other than words, of course. It works equally well with images, but that's another issue.
Be very very wary when you find yourself in a culture that is rapidly redefining established terms. We are in such a culture. When the language starts getting redefined rapidly away from specificity and toward a state of being a carrier of an emotional state, there are very bad things coming.
| 416 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:28:20pm |
| 417 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:31:19pm |
Is NYT terrorist? They published these materials in agreement with WL. WL, I should note, did not "steal" these materials - Manning did. So it doesn't matter how long a chain - whether it's Manning -> WL or Manning -> WL -> NYT, shouldn't NYT be judged on the same level as WL?
| 419 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:34:06pm |
re: #411 ozbloke
Hi Marjorie,
I lurked for ages, still do most of the time.
I am fascinated by US/World politics, however, I am not intimately knowledgeable about any aspect of it.
For me, LGF is a great blog, where many views can be expressed and argued.
So many posters have a depth of knowledge within specific fields, its an education and a privilege to read or post here.
Please let me encourage you, give posters a chance, if they are trolls it will say more about them then it does about you.
You know, I've workshopped that? And it just doesn't work for me anymore. If I'm wrong, I'll totally admit it, but after the fact. If I make someone uncomfortable, when they'll have to get over it.
If you have a nic so old that you've posted nothing and you want to post, make another nic. Registration is open fairly often. Now, in fact. But having nothing to say for over a year? Sock puppet to me.
| 420 |
iossarian Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:34:07pm |
re: #404 negativ
Fuck me, I'm so glad I don't work for one of "those" corporations any more.
Here's a hint: if you have to go to a massive rally in a soulless five-star hotel in order to listen to some VP try to persuade you that you're part of something real and meaningful, then you're not part of something real and meaningful.
| 421 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:36:40pm |
re: #417 Sergey Romanov
(If someone will argue that the number of nodes in this chain matters: what if Manning did not directly send his materials to WL, but rather to a third person who would give them to WL? It's exactly the same situation as with Manning sending them to WL and WL sending them to NYT.)
| 422 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:37:00pm |
re: #415 Fozzie Bear
Propaganda is defined as the use of media to elicit a desired act on the part of the intended audience of the media.
I think it would be best to point out here that one of the most powerful propaganda techniques available is the process of turning a word from a vessel bearing a specific meaning, to a symbol bearing a certain emotional impact. It simply takes repetition of a term in a context that would carry a certain emotional impact the the audience. It doesn't take long before the meaning is replaced with emotion. This has in large part been done to the word "terrorist" among other terms. It can happen with things other than words, of course. It works equally well with images, but that's another issue.
Be very very wary when you find yourself in a culture that is rapidly redefining established terms. We are in such a culture. When the language starts getting redefined rapidly away from specificity and toward a state of being a carrier of an emotional state, there are very bad things coming.
A parallel assumption will be that when the use of language results, as it so often does, in the creation or aggravation of disagreements and conflicts, there is something linguistically wrong with the speaker, the listener, or both.
S.I. Hawakawa, Language in Thought and Action
We all have our individual unconscious assumptions about language that have an emotional effect on us, even when we don't realize it.
While I generally agree with what you've said, I wonder if, in a discussion forum, it might be better to discuss and clarify rather than lecture others on the specific words they've chosen to use.
| 423 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:37:41pm |
re: #420 iossarian
Fuck me, I'm so glad I don't work for one of "those" corporations any more.
Here's a hint: if you have to go to a massive rally in a soulless five-star hotel in order to listen to some VP try to persuade you that you're part of something real and meaningful, then you're not part of something real and meaningful.
But if the money's good...
/
| 424 |
iossarian Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:38:50pm |
re: #423 garhighway
But if the money's good...
/
Well exactly. This is (in part) why investment bankers make a load of money. They are selling their souls in a very real way.
| 425 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:41:05pm |
re: #424 iossarian
Well exactly. This is (in part) why investment bankers make a load of money. They are selling their souls in a very real way.
I think it's more that they are in the room when giant sacks of cash are changing hands. It is a lot easier to make big money when you are around big transactions than it is if you are making your coin through little ones. A point here, a point there...
| 426 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:41:20pm |
| 427 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:42:00pm |
re: #415 Fozzie Bear
Propaganda is defined as the use of media to elicit a desired act on the part of the intended audience of the media.
Any opinion expressed through art is propaganda.
NOW LOOK WHAT YOU'VE DONE. We now have to argue about 1) what constitutes an "opinion", the relative usefulness of opinion itself (never mind specific opinions), and in the midst of all that we are to argue about what is and is not "art".
SPARK: It's "art" under either one of two circumstances:
* the originator asserts that it is "art",
* the viewer perceives it as "art".
Outsite those parameters, a universal invitation to Go Fuck Yourself should be assumed.
| 428 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:42:07pm |
re: #411 ozbloke
Btw, Oz, I think we bumped heads once or twice, but I think you're pretty groovy all the same.
| 429 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:42:16pm |
re: #426 Killgore Trout
Serious Questions about the Obama Administration's Incompetence in the Wikileaks Fiasco
by Sarah Palin
She's questioning the administration's incompetence? Doesn't that mean she thinks it is competent?
| 430 |
Stanghazi Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:42:27pm |
re: #426 Killgore Trout
Serious Questions about the Obama Administration's Incompetence in the Wikileaks Fiasco
by Sarah Palin
Aw Jesus.
| 431 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:42:57pm |
| 432 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:43:12pm |
re: #419 marjoriemoon
You know, I've workshopped that? And it just doesn't work for me anymore. If I'm wrong, I'll totally admit it, but after the fact. If I make someone uncomfortable, when they'll have to get over it.
If you have a nic so old that you've posted nothing and you want to post, make another nic. Registration is open fairly often. Now, in fact. But having nothing to say for over a year? Sock puppet to me.
Of course its up to you.
I would like to see 'regulars' encouraging the lurkers to come out of the woodwork, after all there are a lot of reasons people may lurk, and all lurkers aren't trolls.
I don't like to see 'conversation stoppers' put on people who after all may have just worked up the courage to speak on a topic that they feel passionate about, not that I am accusing you of that.
I don't think more than one nic is encouraged by Charles either, please correct me if I am wrong on that.
I am sure with time, trolls will out themselves, and will then be dealt with accordingly.
After all, we got to where we are now.
Peace be with you.
| 433 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:43:32pm |
re: #426 Killgore Trout
Serious Questions about the Obama Administration's Incompetence in the Wikileaks Fiasco
by Sarah Palin
I wonder who wrote it for her?
| 434 |
Shiplord Kirel Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:44:23pm |
re: #410 Fozzie Bear
You all are are pentifricating my obstentiouslessness.
Fuck language, I say. We don't need words to mean things, lets just use them as slightly advanced grunts to express displeasure. Who needs meaning, when we have so much authentic feeling to go around. I refudiate the need for agreed-upon definitions. That's such a commie thing to do, anyway. I prefer FREEEDOM.
Is that you, Sarah?
| 435 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:44:32pm |
re: #433 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
I wonder who wrote it for her?
It kind of sounds like Lomberg from Office Space.
| 436 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:44:56pm |
re: #422 reine.de.tout
A parallel assumption will be that when the use of language results, as it so often does, in the creation or aggravation of disagreements and conflicts, there is something linguistically wrong with the speaker, the listener, or both.
S.I. Hawakawa, Language in Thought and ActionWe all have our individual unconscious assumptions about language that have an emotional effect on us, even when we don't realize it.
While I generally agree with what you've said, I wonder if, in a discussion forum, it might be better to discuss and clarify rather than lecture others on the specific words they've chosen to use.
Thanks Reine, quite profound.
| 437 |
iossarian Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:45:20pm |
re: #425 garhighway
I think it's more that they are in the room when giant sacks of cash are changing hands. It is a lot easier to make big money when you are around big transactions than it is if you are making your coin through little ones. A point here, a point there...
Well, that's part of it as well. But (from my somewhat limited experience of investment banking), there are plenty of guys making six figures who don't have the opportunity to actually fiddle the books to their own advantage.
So, why do banks pay these young men shedloads of money to do work that, while demanding, is not actually all that difficult? I think it's largely because no-one grows up dreaming of becoming an investment banker. They are being paid to forget that there are better things they could be doing with their lives.
| 438 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:46:57pm |
re: #428 marjoriemoon
Btw, Oz, I think we bumped heads once or twice, but I think you're pretty groovy all the same.
Why bless your heart.
I certainly see you as one of the saner heads.
Thoughtful and respectful.
| 439 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:48:12pm |
re: #426 Killgore Trout
From the comments:
My opinion is that the entire release of the documents may well have been orchestrated by the Obama administration to destroy our sovereignty.
It's all a facade,they want us scared ,so they can take over control of the net.
They want it to happen, they want unrest in the nation so they can come and deal with the "crisis"!!
| 440 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:48:46pm |
re: #437 iossarian
Well, that's part of it as well. But (from my somewhat limited experience of investment banking), there are plenty of guys making six figures who don't have the opportunity to actually fiddle the books to their own advantage.
So, why do banks pay these young men shedloads of money to do work that, while demanding, is not actually all that difficult? I think it's largely because no-one grows up dreaming of becoming an investment banker. They are being paid to forget that there are better things they could be doing with their lives.
But if that is the reason we'd be paying coal miners seven figures, too.
No, it's that there is a real difference in outcomes (if you are Goldman or some such entity) if you can get smarter people. So they pay more. Make no mistake about it: Goldman hires brains. (They look for, and get, other qualities as well. And they can afford to be picky.)
| 442 |
S'latch Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:49:10pm |
Wikileaks is going to end up causing some people to get killed.
| 443 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:49:37pm |
re: #428 marjoriemoon
Btw, Oz, I think we bumped heads once or twice, but I think you're pretty groovy all the same.
The only time we did was when I was trying to elicit an apology from someone.
I felt I deserved it, still do still waiting.
Life is short, I won't hold my breath, and I don't hold a grudge.
| 444 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:49:44pm |
| 445 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:50:25pm |
re: #439 Obdicut
I looked over comments in Russian blogs and quite a lot are sure that all this was staged to make the Americans look good (because that's what they gather from the leaks).
| 446 |
Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:51:23pm |
re: #442 Lawrence Schmerel
Wikileaks is going to end up causing some people to get killed.
Most likely, American media pundits will be the ones killing each other.
| 447 |
Obdicut Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:51:43pm |
re: #441 Stanley Sea
Heh. Some of them, Poe's Law applies:
This is almost as bad as his TSA not searching under a Muslins headgear yet lifting the dress of a Christian women.
...
GO WIKILEAKS.... may be we should ask Obama about BUILDERBERG group oh wait Mrs. Clinton too!!!!
| 448 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:52:13pm |
| 449 |
recusancy Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:52:25pm |
re: #442 Lawrence Schmerel
Wikileaks is going to end up causing some people to get killed.
So did invading Iraq.
| 450 |
iossarian Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:52:48pm |
re: #440 garhighway
But if that is the reason we'd be paying coal miners seven figures, too.
No, it's that there is a real difference in outcomes (if you are Goldman or some such entity) if you can get smarter people. So they pay more. Make no mistake about it: Goldman hires brains. (They look for, and get, other qualities as well. And they can afford to be picky.)
I shouldn't have been so glib about "not all that difficult". Obviously there is the need to attract smart people.
On the other hand, those same very smart people frequently accept much lower rates of pay to take up jobs with more intangible rewards, such as teaching. This suggests that they are definitely giving something up when going into the IB world (or other similar pursuits), which does have real value.
| 451 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:52:58pm |
re: #447 Obdicut
Heh. Some of them, Poe's Law applies:
...
Meanwhile, the Queen, the Pope and Col Sanders remain the real puppet masters.
| 452 |
iossarian Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:53:25pm |
| 453 |
garhighway Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:54:06pm |
re: #450 iossarian
I shouldn't have been so glib about "not all that difficult". Obviously there is the need to attract smart people.
On the other hand, those same very smart people frequently accept much lower rates of pay to take up jobs with more intangible rewards, such as teaching. This suggests that they are definitely giving something up when going into the IB world (or other similar pursuits), which does have real value.
Fair enough. Blankfein notwithstanding, they aren't doing God's work and they know it.
| 455 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 1:59:52pm |
You killed the internet!re: #454 iossarian
| 456 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:00:15pm |
re: #443 ozbloke
The only time we did was when I was trying to elicit an apology from someone.
I felt I deserved it, still do still waiting.Life is short, I won't hold my breath, and I don't hold a grudge.
Oof was the apology from me?? I thought it was over the Middle East, which is were I tend to get the crankiest.
Oh I understand intimidation. I don't post much really (check out my stats). It took me awhile to get my feet wet here, but that was a different time, I guess.
No, you shouldn't have sock puppets, but if you never posted at all, I don't think a new nic would be a problem.
The funny thing is they aren't pulling anything over on Charles. They THINK they are. He plays with them like a cat with a little mousie.
| 457 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:00:31pm |
If you're careful, the folded aluminum foil lid makes a great hat.
Recycle FTW!!!
| 458 |
Shiplord Kirel Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:02:19pm |
re: #451 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Meanwhile, the Queen, the Pope and Col Sanders remain the real puppet masters.
Reminds me of a Playboy cartoon from the late 60s (I only look at it for the pictures, you see).
Two policement are dragging a handcuffe Col. Sanders to a waiting paddy wagon. A bystander is telling another, "I guess they figured out what the 11 secret herbs and spices are."
| 459 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:04:38pm |
Meanwhile some of the Russian online media spins some of the alleged Georgia-related leaks, apparently falsifying their meaning (taking out of context etc.). The alleged reports (alleged - because they're not on cablegate yet) by Amb. Taft support the Georgian version of the start of the war, while the aforementioned sites try to spin it in the opposite direction.
[Link: aillarionov.livejournal.com...]
| 460 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:09:30pm |
re: #447 Obdicut
LIFTING THE DRESSES?!?!? OF GOOD CHRISTIAN WOMEN?!?!?!
| 461 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:09:41pm |
re: #456 marjoriemoon
Oof was the apology from me?? I thought it was over the Middle East, which is were I tend to get the crankiest.
Oh I understand intimidation. I don't post much really (check out my stats). It took me awhile to get my feet wet here, but that was a different time, I guess.
No, you shouldn't have sock puppets, but if you never posted at all, I don't think a new nic would be a problem.
The funny thing is they aren't pulling anything over on Charles. They THINK they are. He plays with them like a cat with a little mousie.
Sorry Marjorie if I left you with the feeling I was talking about you, I was not.
Yes it was over the middle east, you were defending a friend who I believe you thought I was having a shot at. You probably felt I was being harsh, I apologized to you.
I was actually returning a line that had been delivered to me (unfairly) the day before.
Honestly. its no biggy, if I make an error, or misjudge a person's character or intent I will apologize.
I have to accept not all people can do that.
| 462 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:11:51pm |
re: #443 ozbloke
The only time we did was when I was trying to elicit an apology from someone.
I felt I deserved it, still do still waiting.Life is short, I won't hold my breath, and I don't hold a grudge.
My sun is in Aquarius. I have a Scorpio raising and Scorpio moon. Most of the rest of my chart sits in Aquarius (7 other planets). That means, for one thing, I'm all about holding grudges LOL
In real life, when my family upsets me, I just pretend it didn't happen. Really not too healthy, I suppose, but I don't want to hold a grudge against my family and it's so natural for me to go there.
A member of my family was married for 15 years to a rage-a-holic. He ruined every holiday dinner and every vacation we had for those 15 years. I said nothing to my family member. Well, once I said something with the caveat that I'll never speak it again and I didn't. It was her decision to stay with him, not mine. Eventually she left him. It's not easy to love someone like that, but I just tried to focus my attention on her not him.
| 463 |
DaddyG Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:14:02pm |
re: #460 WindUpBird
LIFTING THE DRESSES?!?!? OF GOOD CHRISTIAN WOMEN?!?!?!
Good Christian Women would be wearing bloomers.
| 464 |
b_sharp Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:15:12pm |
re: #461 ozbloke
Sorry Marjorie if I left you with the feeling I was talking about you, I was not.
Yes it was over the middle east, you were defending a friend who I believe you thought I was having a shot at. You probably felt I was being harsh, I apologized to you.
I was actually returning a line that had been delivered to me (unfairly) the day before.
Honestly. its no biggy, if I make an error, or misjudge a person's character or intent I will apologize.
I have to accept not all people can do that.
Some of us are never wrong.
| 465 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:15:43pm |
| 466 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:15:47pm |
re: #281 Amory Blaine
Couldn't legislatures in office who advance the idea that Obama is not legitimate be considered terrorists?
They're certainly terrorizing our self respect as a country, hahaha
basically, the world is watching politicians in our country (I'm looking at you, Texas) behave like a pack of feral children
| 467 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:16:09pm |
re: #463 DaddyG
Good Christian Women would be wearing bloomers.
"You're not wearing a bustle."
-doc Holliday
| 468 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:16:10pm |
re: #462 marjoriemoon
My sun is in Aquarius. I have a Scorpio raising and Scorpio moon. Most of the rest of my chart sits in Aquarius (7 other planets). That means, for one thing, I'm all about holding grudges LOL
In real life, when my family upsets me, I just pretend it didn't happen. Really not too healthy, I suppose, but I don't want to hold a grudge against my family and it's so natural for me to go there.
A member of my family was married for 15 years to a rage-a-holic. He ruined every holiday dinner and every vacation we had for those 15 years. I said nothing to my family member. Well, once I said something with the caveat that I'll never speak it again and I didn't. It was her decision to stay with him, not mine. Eventually she left him. It's not easy to love someone like that, but I just tried to focus my attention on her not him.
Fortunately we get to choose friends. Family, not so much.
I'm now wondering if we are related, because you are describing my step father.
| 469 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:16:41pm |
9-11 Victim Families Criticize Napolitano Comments
Relatives of 9-11 victims are criticizing Fox Business Network's Andrew Napolitano for his claim last week that the government is hiding facts surrounding the September 11 attacks.Those who spoke with Media Matters either dismissed the claims of a conspiracy or criticized Napolitano for raising the issue as they continue to seek closure.
Napolitano made the comments on November 23 during an interview on Alex Jones' radio show.
Fox News doesn't question Napolitano about his 9-11 conspiracy views
| 470 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:19:11pm |
re: #468 ozbloke
Fortunately we get to choose friends. Family, not so much.
I'm now wondering if we are related, because you are describing my step father.
I have some family I dig during the holidays, and some I don't. The ones I don't like? I ignore them! And then I hang out in the kitchen or the den of my parents' place with my brother and we booze up and giggle like the kids in the back of the class
it's really satisfying hearing some dumb blowhard uncle of mine start holding court about BSGDSUIS LIBERALS AGAUSGS EVIL ROCK MUSIC , and then I just pleasantly take my Long Island and leave the room, it's the best feeling
| 471 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:19:47pm |
re: #461 ozbloke
Sorry Marjorie if I left you with the feeling I was talking about you, I was not.
Yes it was over the middle east, you were defending a friend who I believe you thought I was having a shot at. You probably felt I was being harsh, I apologized to you.
I was actually returning a line that had been delivered to me (unfairly) the day before.
Honestly. its no biggy, if I make an error, or misjudge a person's character or intent I will apologize.
I have to accept not all people can do that.
No, I didn't feel you were talking about me, but you remember the incident better than I. Part of the "letting go" thing I practice. Sometimes I don't remember details of personal incidents.
What's really super freaky is my mother and I have completely different versions of the same incidents when I was a kid. Freakishly different. I want to say she's older and her memory is therefore worse, but I'm not sure that's true.
| 472 |
Kronocide Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:19:51pm |
Hannity and others keep saying 'clear and present danger' about Wikileaks. As deplorable and wrong as what they did I have a feeling wingnuts may start talking of 'taking out' Assange.
| 473 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:20:25pm |
re: #468 ozbloke
Fortunately we get to choose friends. Family, not so much.
I'm now wondering if we are related, because you are describing my step father.
lol It was my stepfather.
| 474 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:20:57pm |
re: #472 BigPapa
Hannity and others keep saying 'clear and present danger' about Wikileaks. As deplorable and wrong as what they did I have a feeling wingnuts may start talking of 'taking out' Assange.
That's what they say about everything they don't like!
And then they read Soldier of Fortune and collect their social security check
| 475 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:23:38pm |
| 476 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:24:09pm |
re: #468 ozbloke
Fortunately we get to choose friends. Family, not so much.
I'm now wondering if we are related, because you are describing my step father.
And you know what? He looked like Leslie Neilsen.
When my mother finally decided she had enough, she didn't know quite what to do - physically, how to leave. He had just been to the doc for a check-up and his cholesterol was really high. I told her to start feeding him more sausage :>
| 477 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:24:41pm |
re: #473 marjoriemoon
lol It was my stepfather.
Its not so funny when it is a step father, because as a child there is no where to run nowhere to hide, and no one speaking up.
| 478 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:24:51pm |
| 479 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:25:19pm |
re: #477 ozbloke
Its not so funny when it is a step father, because as a child there is no where to run nowhere to hide, and no one speaking up.
I was grown already when she married him. But yes, that is a whole other story.
| 480 |
cliffster Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:25:25pm |
re: #468 ozbloke
Fortunately we get to choose friends. Family, not so much.
you can pick your friends, and you can pick your nose, but you can't wipe your friends under the couch cushion.
| 481 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:26:37pm |
re: #476 marjoriemoon
And you know what? He looked like Leslie Neilsen.
When my mother finally decided she had enough, she didn't know quite what to do - physically, how to leave. He had just been to the doc for a check-up and his cholesterol was really high. I told her to start feeding him more sausage :>
I inspired to hear some women do learn.
| 482 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:27:18pm |
GOP brain behind "Don't Vote" ads proposes Astro-Turf "Tequila Party" for Latinos.
Robert de Posada, the former GOP operative behind this fall's controversial "Don't Vote" ads aimed at Latinos in Nevada and California, tells The Lookout that he has heard "rumblings" of this movement among national Latino leaders.
"The Tequila Party is a great concept to basically say, 'You know what? This blind support for you is coming to an end,'" De Posada says. "If you are perceived as someone who will never vote for a Republican, then you're screwed," because Democrats will take you for granted, he says.
| 483 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:28:31pm |
Becky-boy is using the Ireland austerity program to pump Goldline and his food insurance scams.
Who could have seen that coming?
| 484 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:30:01pm |
re: #483 Linden Arden
Becky-boy is using the Ireland austerity program to pump Goldline and his food insurance scams.
Who could have seen that coming?
I hear he tried to connect Sorros to Wikileaks today too.
| 485 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:30:15pm |
re: #483 Linden Arden
Becky-boy is using the Ireland austerity program to pump Goldline and his food insurance scams.
Who could have seen that coming?
No matter what the news, Beck would use it to promote his scams.
| 486 |
Randall Gross Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:30:40pm |
re: #469 Killgore Trout
To tie the thread up in a neat bow, Justin Raimondo used to get special invites to the Rockford gatherings of nativists and ultraconservatives Deceased Arch-Con Paul Weyrich used to host. Those gatherings included outright white supremacists of the Sam Francis ilk, Tanton nativists, and the usual crowd from the Robert Taft gatherings. Oathkeepers grew out of the nativist movement...
| 487 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:31:19pm |
re: #471 marjoriemoon
What's really super freaky is my mother and I have completely different versions of the same incidents when I was a kid. Freakishly different. I want to say she's older and her memory is therefore worse, but I'm not sure that's true.
Well, I am one of four, my mother has wonderful memories, she just can't tell which kid is which, and has the wrong child in events that more often than not sorta did happen.
Peoples recollections make for an interesting topic, as we remember so much, but often don't realize that outside influences that adjust our versions of events.
And knowing the quality of some of the posters here, and reflecting on my last paragraph, you can see why I lurk a lot :)
| 488 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:33:21pm |
re: #487 ozbloke
And knowing the quality of some of the posters here, and reflecting on my last paragraph, you can see why I lurk a lot :)
ILurkALot could be a good nic
| 489 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:33:55pm |
re: #422 reine.de.tout
A parallel assumption will be that when the use of language results, as it so often does, in the creation or aggravation of disagreements and conflicts, there is something linguistically wrong with the speaker, the listener, or both.
S.I. Hawakawa, Language in Thought and ActionWe all have our individual unconscious assumptions about language that have an emotional effect on us, even when we don't realize it.
While I generally agree with what you've said, I wonder if, in a discussion forum, it might be better to discuss and clarify rather than lecture others on the specific words they've chosen to use.
I agree that we often have different definitions of some words, especially depending on the context in which they're used. As a matter of fact, it happened with me the other day when I placed Geller and the WBC Phelps clan in the same category. I used the term "wingnut" in a way that had a very specific meaning (to me, in that particular context), when I probably shouldn't have as the term really doesn't have that meaning to most people, especially on a blog that focuses on politics where the term is used in a more general sense.
I see the same misunderstanding arise fairly regularly in the business world as well. Several years ago I was working for a company where the boss said "make the text bigger" in reference to a layout. This was interpreted three different ways by three different people: I thought she meant to increase the font size; someone else thought she meant to use an extended (wider) variant of the font; what she actually meant was to increase the leading (space) between the lines.
*waves at rest of lizards*
| 490 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:34:04pm |
| 491 |
webevintage Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:34:07pm |
re: #433 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
I wonder who wrote it for her?
Well she must have written some of it since the logic of her whine is moronic.
| 492 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:34:14pm |
re: #486 Thanos
To tie the thread up in a neat bow, Justin Raimondo used to get special invites to the Rockford gatherings of nativists and ultraconservatives Deceased Arch-Con Paul Weyrich used to host. Those gatherings included outright white supremacists of the Sam Francis ilk, Tanton nativists, and the usual crowd from the Robert Taft gatherings. Oathkeepers grew out of the nativist movement...
I need to read up on Taft. The Tea Parties are dragging the Republican Party back well past Reagan. They might be angling for another Taft.
| 493 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:35:38pm |
re: #474 WindUpBird
That's what they say about everything they don't like!
And then they read Soldier of Fortune and collect their social security check
oh yeah? well, as soon as i cash mine, i'm comin' for ya...that'll learn ya///
oh wait you live in portland and it's warm here in jacksonville, nevermind
| 494 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:36:01pm |
re: #486 Thanos
To tie the thread up in a neat bow, Justin Raimondo used to get special invites to the Rockford gatherings of nativists and ultraconservatives Deceased Arch-Con Paul Weyrich used to host. Those gatherings included outright white supremacists of the Sam Francis ilk, Tanton nativists, and the usual crowd from the Robert Taft gatherings. Oathkeepers grew out of the nativist movement...
They're having a reunion next month!
/semi
| 495 |
What, me worry? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:36:31pm |
re: #487 ozbloke
Well, I am one of four, my mother has wonderful memories, she just can't tell which kid is which, and has the wrong child in events that more often than not sorta did happen.
Peoples recollections make for an interesting topic, as we remember so much, but often don't realize that outside influences that adjust our versions of events.
And knowing the quality of some of the posters here, and reflecting on my last paragraph, you can see why I lurk a lot :)
You don't lurk so much. You have good input.
Check out my stats. I don't post very much really for the time I've been here.
Have to jet. Good to chat at you, Oz :>
| 496 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:36:36pm |
re: #490 wrenchwench
I believe we have a SirLurksALot.
Oh, way to go wrenchwench, throw a spanner in the works ;)
| 497 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:36:51pm |
Finally!
Athlete blames God for bungled play
It wasn't his own hands or the Pittsburgh secondary Sunday that foiled Buffalo Bills wide receiver Steve Johnson from hauling in what should have been the game-winning TD catch in the end zone.
It was God.
"I PRAISE YOU 24/7!!!!!!" the 24-year-old tweeted from his iPad at around 5:15 Sunday after the Steelers' 19-16 overtime victory. "AND THIS HOW YOU DO ME!!!!! YOU EXPECT ME TO LEARN FROM THIS??? HOW???!!! ILL NEVER FORGET THIS!! EVER!!! THX THO..."
| 498 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:37:13pm |
re: #493 Aceofwhat?
oh yeah? well, as soon as i cash mine, i'm comin' for ya...that'll learn ya///
oh wait you live in portland and it's warm here in jacksonville, nevermind
Actually, yeah, it's cold and wet right now. The kind of cold that goes right through.
| 499 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:38:19pm |
re: #495 marjoriemoon
You don't lurk so much. You have good input.
Check out my stats. I don't post very much really for the time I've been here.
Have to jet. Good to chat at you, Oz :>
And you, thanks.
| 500 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:38:49pm |
re: #463 DaddyG
Good Christian Women would be wearing bloomers.
I prefer bad catholic girls to good christian women.
| 501 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:39:00pm |
| 502 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:39:25pm |
re: #484 Killgore Trout
I hear he tried to connect Sorros to Wikileaks today too.
Soros is working to kill US sovereignty and turn us all into Euro-Secularists!
(oh how I hate Beck - lest there be any doubt)
| 503 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:39:44pm |
re: #498 EmmmieG
Actually, yeah, it's cold and wet right now. The kind of cold that goes right through.
That definitely puts a damper on my part-time soldiering. That, and the only gun i own is at my dad's cabin in Amish Ohio. That, and if i got anywhere near mountains i'd trade the gun for a snowboard.
Hmm. I'm not real good at this internet rage thing yet...where's my inner archconservative when i need it/
| 504 |
Usually refered to as anyways Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:40:31pm |
| 505 |
ihateronpaul Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:40:38pm |
re: #3 lawhawk
Iran is of course blaming the US and Israel for taking out one of Iran's top nuclear scientists and injuring another in coordinated bomb attacks. The wikileaks memos show that far from being alone in their desire to stop Iran, the US and Israel are joined by pretty much everyone else in the Middle East in trying to stop Iran's nuclear program.
That makes it both easier and more difficult to deal with Iran. Some of those ME regimes don't want to openly cooperate with the US because of domestic opposition to the US (and/or Israel) but recognize Iran's threat to regional stability. So, while now more of this is out in the open, it reduces the operating space for those regimes to work in concert with the US to stop Iran's nuclear program.
In short, this complicates matters greatly.
The last thing I want to say is "In Iran's defense..." but completely divorced form conspiracy theory land those are the two countries most likely to do such a thing
| 506 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:40:47pm |
re: #503 Aceofwhat?
That definitely puts a damper on my part-time soldiering. That, and the only gun i own is at my dad's cabin in Amish Ohio. That, and if i got anywhere near mountains i'd trade the gun for a snowboard.
Hmm. I'm not real good at this internet rage thing yet...where's my inner archconservative when i need it/
Go to the mall and try to get a parking space right now.
That will release your inner rage.
| 507 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:42:41pm |
re: #506 EmmmieG
Go to the mall and try to get a parking space right now.
That will release your inner rage.
I refuse to buy anything other than food during the holdays. It it can't be obtained online, it isn't worth it.
(I detest shopping under the best of conditions. Holiday shopping is like some kind of special hell crafted specifically to drive me out of my mind.)
| 508 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:43:34pm |
re: #506 EmmmieG
Go to the mall and try to get a parking space right now.
That will release your inner rage.
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
| 509 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:44:12pm |
re: #508 Aceofwhat?
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
Buy her an electric shaver with your initials on it. /
| 510 |
elizajane Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:44:55pm |
re: #505 ihateronpaul
The last thing I want to say is "In Iran's defense..." but completely divorced form conspiracy theory land those are the two countries most likely to do such a thing
That's what we'd all have said two days ago; but now we know that quite a few of Iran's neighbors have an interest in taking out its nuclear scientists. So rounding up the usual suspects has become that much less simple.
Probably the most useful piece of information to come out of Wikileaks.
| 511 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:44:57pm |
re: #508 Aceofwhat?
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
A recipe book for sandwiches is what every woman really and truly wants.
/
| 512 |
Stanghazi Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:45:48pm |
re: #508 Aceofwhat?
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
Jewels. (My POV and you asked.)
| 513 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:46:03pm |
re: #508 Aceofwhat?
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
My brother called me one year to ask how I like our steam cleaner, because he was going to get his wife one. For her birthday.
Long pause on my end.
"Do you have her specific permission, in so many words, to do this?"
| 514 |
elizajane Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:46:31pm |
re: #482 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
GOP brain behind "Don't Vote" ads proposes Astro-Turf "Tequila Party" for Latinos.
This is from The Onion, right?
| 515 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:46:50pm |
re: #497 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Finally!
That reminded me of an article I read in the laundromat yesterday. Wingnut Christians are hoping Lance Armstrong gets taken down a peg or two.
It will be a terrible blow to many people if it turns out that cycling great Lance Armstrong was a doper, but there could be a silver lining | Mark Bergin
The nation's preeminent sports columnists are wringing their hands. If doping allegations against seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong prove true, what will become of the thousands of cancer patients who draw strength from his story? If the man who overcame a brain tumor to become the most successful cyclist ever is a lying, cheating fraud, might that birth cynicism in the minds of people once filled with hope?It's a valid question, one no doubt weighing heavy on Armstrong's mind. He recently completed what may prove his final Tour ride and has now secured legal counsel to guide him through a forthcoming investigation. Whether guilty or innocent, the charges alone will do nothing but sour the image of the most respected athlete in the country, a man responsible for raising millions of dollars in cancer research and providing resources and inspiration to help thousands beat the disease.
Much global good could well result if officials clear Armstrong of the charges levied by his former teammate Floyd Landis, a convicted doper himself. But should the charges stick, should Food and Drug Administration agent Jeff Novitzky prove that the cycling great juiced his way to victory, could any worldwide benefit emerge from that?
On the heels of two sparkling sports megastars suffering public image collapses—namely, swimmer Michael Phelps and golfer Tiger Woods—a third such scandal could awaken people to the folly of elevating athletes to angelic status. An Armstrong fall from grace would carry more weight in that regard than those of Phelps or Woods, neither of whom ever claimed moral superiority. For Armstrong, the moral high ground is central to his appeal, his brand, his identity.
In the minds of millions of fans, Armstrong is more than great. He is good, and now intent on employing that reputation to avoid undue scrutiny. "As long as we have a legitimate and credible and fair investigation, we'll be happy to cooperate, but I'm not going to participate in any kind of witch hunt," he said. "I've done too many good things for too many people."
So he's too arrogant. What they don't say is that he's public about being an atheist. He doesn't credit his cure or his athletic success to God. I think that's why they want to see him fall.
| 516 |
Stanghazi Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:48:03pm |
Comment relating to the Palin FB scribe:
We're watching the fucktard500.
| 517 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:49:05pm |
| 518 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:49:07pm |
re: #515 wrenchwench
He also didn't have brain cancer.
| 519 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:49:51pm |
re: #512 Stanley Sea
Jewels. (My POV and you asked.)
the first year we were married, i bought her an awesome tennis bracelet. she didn't want it, said she didn't like rubies.
guess who doesn't get jewels anymore;)
| 520 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:50:44pm |
re: #519 Aceofwhat?
the first year we were married, i bought her an awesome tennis bracelet. she didn't want it, said she didn't like rubies.
guess who doesn't get jewels anymore;)
A laser pointer and a cat?
Well, it's amusing.
| 521 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:51:03pm |
| 522 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:51:12pm |
re: #519 Aceofwhat?
the first year we were married, i bought her an awesome tennis bracelet. she didn't want it, said she didn't like rubies.
guess who doesn't get jewels anymore;)
A collection of Jane Austen movies?
| 523 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:51:22pm |
re: #513 EmmmieG
My brother called me one year to ask how I like our steam cleaner, because he was going to get his wife one. For her birthday.
Long pause on my end.
"Do you have her specific permission, in so many words, to do this?"
I have definitely been racking my brain to remember any such...ermmm...'instruments' that she might have coveted out loud this year. I figure if it's said out loud, i am permitted to interpret it as a hint.
| 524 |
wrenchwench Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:51:38pm |
re: #518 EmmmieG
He also didn't have brain cancer.
He did have cancerous lesions on his brain, but yeah, pretty much everybody knows it was testicular cancer. Maybe they don't want to have the word "testicle" in their magazine.
| 525 |
Stanghazi Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:51:48pm |
re: #519 Aceofwhat?
the first year we were married, i bought her an awesome tennis bracelet. she didn't want it, said she didn't like rubies.
guess who doesn't get jewels anymore;)
OMG
Hell, I'll accept a trip to the mall for me to pick something out. I love jewelry, all kinds, a LOT.
OK, how bout a tandem bike? I'm clueless.
| 526 |
Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:51:48pm |
[Link: www.vedomosti.ru...]
Vasily Yakemenko, the head of "Rusmolodyozh" (Federal Agency of Russia for Youth Affairs), the figure behind most, if not all pro-Kremlin youth movements is tied to mafia, as Vedomosti informs.
[Link: www.vedomosti.ru...]
He is one of the founders of the firm "Akbars", created in 1994 in Moscow. All its other co-founders (5 persons) were criminals, leaders of "one of the most cruel gangs in Russia", acc. to Vedomosti. One of the founders, Yeremenko, got a life sentence in 2006, the others - summarily 400 years for "banditism, organizing of a criminal organization, kidnapping and 14 murder cases in the period from 1993 to 2001".
All I can say is "fuck".
| 527 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:52:06pm |
| 528 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:52:12pm |
My wife's Christmas Wishlist;
WoW Cataclysm Expansion
Sailormoon DVD set
Food Processor
| 529 |
Randall Gross Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:53:04pm |
re: #502 Linden Arden
Soros is working to kill US sovereignty and turn us all into Euro-Secularists!
(oh how I hate Beck - lest there be any doubt)
Speaking of Beck I saw two begging for money ads during Previews at Harry Potter today : one was Beck pimping his new book and for pay appearance schedule, the other was Robin Williams asking for money for St. Jude's children hospital. Robin's more likely to get my money than Beck.
| 530 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:53:25pm |
re: #527 Aceofwhat?
And a Luger to use on myself? Yowza;)
I didn't say you had to be there.
Jane Austen movies, new fuzzy slippers, some hot chocolate, and a big collection of Pepperidge Farm cookies.
| 531 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:53:38pm |
Speaking of cancer - best wishes for Michael Douglas.
(don't know much at all - just heard he had throat cancer) - and have not seen Wall St II yet....... I guess it bombed.
| 532 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:54:11pm |
re: #525 Stanley Sea
OMG
Hell, I'll accept a trip to the mall for me to pick something out. I love jewelry, all kinds, a LOT.
OK, how bout a tandem bike? I'm clueless.
I'd definitely buy her a bike if i thought she'd use it. Yeah, i'm clueless too. Time to start plumbing my family to see if she's dropped any hints in their direction.
| 533 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:54:40pm |
re: #531 Linden Arden
Speaking of cancer - best wishes for Michael Douglas.
(don't know much at all - just heard he had throat cancer) - and have not seen Wall St II yet... I guess it bombed.
It was a must see movie no one went to see.
| 534 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:56:30pm |
re: #530 EmmmieG
I didn't say you had to be there.
Jane Austen movies, new fuzzy slippers, some hot chocolate, and a big collection of Pepperidge Farm cookies.
hmmm. that's not bad.
when we were dating, i was once locked in my apartment with a bad fever and she brought over tea and Anne of Green Gables. So sweet, and so terrible. I didn't have the energy to make it stop and i felt too awful to fall asleep. That was a looong three hours...
| 535 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:56:33pm |
re: #508 Aceofwhat?
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
What about a pampered weekend away at a resort for her and a close girlfriend of hers (or two)? Not that I think you're the kinda guy that needs to be gotten away from, but wives really need that once in a while (especially if they're also moms).
| 536 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:57:46pm |
re: #535 CuriousLurker
What about a pampered weekend away at a resort for her and a close girlfriend of hers (or two)? Not that I think you're the kinda guy that needs to be gotten away from, but wives really need that once in a while (especially if they're also moms).
that would be money if my current job didn't have me in another state from Tues-Fri. but i think that maybe a weekend for the two of us could be just the thing.
you LGF girls are the best. thanks!
| 537 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:58:19pm |
re: #535 CuriousLurker
What about a pampered weekend away at a resort for her and a close girlfriend of hers (or two)? Not that I think you're the kinda guy that needs to be gotten away from, but wives really need that once in a while (especially if they're also moms).
and yes, i can be the kind of guy that needs to be gotten away from at times;)
| 538 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 2:59:45pm |
Don't women have bra and pantie tickle fights when they vacation alone together?
Or is that just my imagination?
| 539 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:00:10pm |
re: #536 Aceofwhat?
that would be money if my current job didn't have me in another state from Tues-Fri. but i think that maybe a weekend for the two of us could be just the thing.
you LGF girls are the best. thanks!
Something really romantic & fun then. You got another job?? YAY!
| 540 |
ProMayaLiberal Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:00:33pm |
On the recent leak, this bit I found on Wikipedia makes me curious.
A rogue shipment of enriched uranium during 2009 apparently was nearly the cause of an environmental disaster.
I have a few questions. Like who, what, where, how and why.
| 541 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:00:48pm |
re: #538 Linden Arden
Don't women have bra and pantie tickle fights when they vacation alone together?
Or is that just my imagination?
Um, that would be your imagination. Heh.
| 542 |
Stanghazi Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:02:16pm |
re: #536 Aceofwhat?
that would be money if my current job didn't have me in another state from Tues-Fri. but i think that maybe a weekend for the two of us could be just the thing.
you LGF girls are the best. thanks!
A trip, already planned & paid for never fails. Get going on travelocity stat.
| 543 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:02:18pm |
re: #541 CuriousLurker
Um, that would be your imagination. Heh.
Everything is perfect in my imagination....
| 544 |
gamark Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:03:15pm |
re: #518 EmmmieG
He also didn't have brain cancer.
It started as testicular cancer and metastisized in his brain. He had brain surgery to remove the tumor. That sounds like brain cancer to me.
| 545 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:03:20pm |
re: #539 CuriousLurker
Something really romantic & fun then. You got another job?? YAY!
Oh, yes, sorry - a friend of my fathers has me consulting for him. The good news is that i have this now and one or two other offers around the corner.
The bad news is that none of them are based in Jacksonville, or require little travel. Ah, well. In this economy, i'm just grateful to have offers.
| 546 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:03:40pm |
| 547 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:05:43pm |
re: #544 gamark
It started as testicular cancer and metastisized in his brain. He had brain surgery to remove the tumor. That sounds like brain cancer to me.
In Emmie's defense, we typically label cancer with regard to its origin.
| 548 |
Dancing along the light of day Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:05:45pm |
re: #538 Linden Arden
Don't women have bra and pantie tickle fights when they vacation alone together?
Or is that just my imagination?
No, some of us prefer Jello wrestling.
///
| 549 |
Kragar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:06:26pm |
re: #541 CuriousLurker
Um, that would be your imagination. Heh.
His AWESOME imagination is what you meant.
| 550 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:06:51pm |
re: #548 Floral Giraffe
No, some of us prefer Jello wrestling.
///
Well that's just mean to throw it out there and watch us squirm/
| 551 |
blueraven Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:08:11pm |
re: #540 ProLifeLiberal
On the recent leak, this bit I found on Wikipedia makes me curious.
I have a few questions. Like who, what, where, how and why.
I remember on Rachel Maddow, she was talking about a secret expedition by the US to South America, I cant remember what country, to remove loose nuclear material. It was right before a major earthquake occurred. Like hours. They barely made it out of the country with all that nuclear material is big drums of some sort. Maybe thats it.
| 552 |
CuriousLurker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:08:27pm |
| 553 |
ProMayaLiberal Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:10:59pm |
re: #551 blueraven
Chile then? Boy, we were lucky on that one. Though I'll have to see if there is something we haven't heard about somewhere else.
| 554 |
gamark Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:11:39pm |
re: #547 Aceofwhat?
Yeah, fair enough. Just wanted to point out that he had a brain tumor (the article didn't say brain cancer anyway).
| 555 |
ProMayaLiberal Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:12:21pm |
re: #549 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Awesome is different things to different people. I'll leave it at that.
| 556 |
darthstar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:18:39pm |
Listening to Saudi Arabia makes as much sense as listening to Sarah Palin. The Saudis don't want to compete with the Iranians for oil markets, and any disruption in Iranian oil flow means money to them...and a US invasion of Iran would tie that oil up for years.
| 557 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:20:52pm |
re: #547 Aceofwhat?
In Emmie's defense, we typically label cancer with regard to its origin.
Exactly.
One type of cancer, based on the origin, is not exactly like another.
| 558 |
darthstar Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:21:27pm |
| 559 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:21:52pm |
re: #556 darthstar
Listening to Saudi Arabia makes as much sense as listening to Sarah Palin. The Saudis don't want to compete with the Iranians for oil markets, and any disruption in Iranian oil flow means money to them...and a US invasion of Iran would tie that oil up for years.
Full quote on 100% agreement.
Iran will annex Iraq and Kurdistan which combined will be much larger in oil reserves.
Saudis don't want that.
| 560 |
blueraven Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:22:00pm |
re: #553 ProLifeLiberal
Chile then? Boy, we were lucky on that one. Though I'll have to see if there is something we haven't heard about somewhere else.
Maybe. Was that in 2009? I remember her saying they got out just before some major port was closed. It was a scary story for sure!
| 561 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:22:39pm |
re: #508 Aceofwhat?
which reminds me...i have no idea what to get my wife this year. she hasn't remembered to drop hints, or at least to drop them where i notice them.
You mean she doesn't cut ads out of the jewelry catalogs and put them on the fridge?
| 562 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:24:38pm |
re: #557 reine.de.tout
Exactly.
One type of cancer, based on the origin, is not exactly like another.
how are things? tout va bien, j'espère?
| 563 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:25:00pm |
re: #561 reine.de.tout
You mean she doesn't cut ads out of the jewelry catalogs and put them on the fridge?
heh. did you see my jewelry comment?
| 564 |
prairiefire Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:27:01pm |
re: #561 reine.de.tout
You mean she doesn't cut ads out of the jewelry catalogs and put them on the fridge?
Where you talking about a Pandora bracelet a couple of days ago? They look nice.
| 565 |
Killgore Trout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:28:05pm |
Glenn Beck Part 1 - The Soros Wikileaks Connection
Soros, Van Jones and Obama released the wikileaks documents for a Czechoslovakian style communist takeover.
| 566 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:31:56pm |
re: #564 prairiefire
Where you talking about a Pandora bracelet a couple of days ago? They look nice.
Yep.
My bracelet has 3 sections - one will be remembrance of my mom, one will be ME, and one will be remembrance of my daughter - birthstone charms, initial charms, and then other charms that are reflective of some memory or other that's precious to me. I asked my daughter to choose the charm she wanted as her "memory" charm. Soooooo . . . they're all in a box right now - and I'm very much looking forward to Christmas!
| 567 |
Linden Arden Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:32:37pm |
re: #565 Killgore Trout
Yet, strangely, Soros fights communism and authoritarianism the world over - and he supports micro-capitalism via $50 loans to low-income women in the third world.....
Hold on! Soros is a secularist! An evil liberal!
Could that be Gwyneth Beck's problem?
(yes, I despise Beck)
| 568 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:32:44pm |
re: #562 Aceofwhat?
how are things? tout va bien, j'espère?
Oui, ca va bien, I can't do the accent marks, sorry.
Et toi?
| 569 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:35:19pm |
re: #507 Fozzie Bear
I refuse to buy anything other than food during the holdays. It it can't be obtained online, it isn't worth it.
(I detest shopping under the best of conditions. Holiday shopping is like some kind of special hell crafted specifically to drive me out of my mind.)
Me too. When I was a young bachelor I went to Kmart on Chrismas Eve day every year. Bada Bing. Ashtrays and batteries for everyone!!
Now my wife does it all. She likes to do it so it works out for all.
| 570 |
prairiefire Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:35:52pm |
I am asking for black lace up Doc Marten boots that have embroidered roses on the side.
| 571 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:36:17pm |
re: #568 reine.de.tout
Oui, ca va bien, I can't do the accent marks, sorry.
Et toi?
7am flight tomorrow...back to the grind!
| 572 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:36:19pm |
re: #570 prairiefire
I am asking for black lace up Doc Marten boots that have embroidered roses on the side.
Photo?
| 573 |
reine.de.tout Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:36:56pm |
re: #571 Aceofwhat?
7am flight tomorrow...back to the grind!
:-(
But you were home for Thanksgiving, right?
I know about those work days away from home - it's hard on everyone, but doable!
| 574 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:38:20pm |
re: #573 reine.de.tout
:-(
But you were home for Thanksgiving, right?
I know about those work days away from home - it's hard on everyone, but doable!
Now that our son is "grown" I like working the holidays. No ones around and it gives the youger guys a break to be home with their families.
| 575 |
APox Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:40:03pm |
Let's listen to Sarah Palin on wikileaks issue:
[Link: [Link: www.facebook.com...]...]
Lynn Rockney says, "Hope you saw Glenn Beck today and saw and heard who is behind this Wikileak. George Soros."
OH MAN
| 576 |
Amory Blaine Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:41:41pm |
re: #575 APox
Let's listen to Sarah Palin on wikileaks issue:
OH MAN
I would rather stick an icepick in my eye.
| 577 |
APox Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:42:56pm |
re: #576 Amory Blaine
I would rather stick an icepick in my eye.
Hawaii Rob has some good insight "SARAH, This was STOLEN U.S. Governement property and intelligence. Obama should have stopped Wikileaks on just these 2 reasons. Another failure by the traveling basketball player"
| 578 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:43:11pm |
re: #573 reine.de.tout
:-(
But you were home for Thanksgiving, right?
I know about those work days away from home - it's hard on everyone, but doable!
yep, took last week off. and when the alternative is not working, it's certainly doable!
| 579 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:44:06pm |
re: #574 Amory Blaine
Now that our son is "grown" I like working the holidays. No ones around and it gives the youger guys a break to be home with their families.
That's a very decent thing to do.
| 580 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:55:00pm |
re: #577 APox
Hawaii Rob has some good insight "SARAH, This was STOLEN U.S. Governement property and intelligence. Obama should have stopped Wikileaks on just these 2 reasons. Another failure by the traveling basketball player"
That's insight?
| 581 |
SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:55:29pm |
re: #35 Killgore Trout
There's a good chance that the dick who stole the emails was part of the Tea Party endorsed "Oathkeepers" anti-government militia movement.
Bradley ManningThese people are dangerous and should not be allowed to serve in the military.
Oy vay gevalt. I assumed he was just a standard overzealous moonbat of some sort.
| 582 |
lostlakehiker Mon, Nov 29, 2010 3:58:59pm |
re: #294 sliv_the_eli
In academic circles, terrorism is generally defined by the action being directed against or with the primary intent of sowing fear among a civilian population without a primary military purpose. It is this which distinguishes terrorism from standard military practices, which are directed against military targets or for legitimate miltary aims.
That, incidentally, is why the claim by the pro-terrorist crowd that Israel engages in "state sponsored terrorism" is patent nonsense. It is also why, whether we like it or not, the use of IED's against troops is not properly classified as terrorism.
Some IED's are mines, and mines have been a perfectly legitimate weapon for over a century. Recently, there's been a push in some circles to "outlaw" mines. It hasn't had much success, because mines are so handy for the side that wants to use them. The U.S. has adjusted its approach to the use of mines, designing mines that turn themselves off, destroy themselves, etc. after a set period of time, or on receipt of the proper coded radio signal. Everybody has mines that permit safe passage to persons or light vehicles, reserving their destructive force for bigger fish.
Other IED's are detonated by command, either wired or electronically. Such IED's are yet more "legitimate" because they aren't mines at all. They're direct fire weapons, if the command comes from someone who sees the target people or vehicles, or indirect fire, if they're detonated according to some plan built around a map and a timetable.
It's not the nature of the weapon that makes for terrorism, it's the choice of target and the purpose. IED's detonated in the middle of a market while shoppers are getting their groceries are being used as terror devices. The U.S. doesn't shell markets just to watch the women and chickens scatter, but if we did, that too would be terrorism.
In WW2, Britain had an area bombing philosophy that she was faintly ashamed of afterward. Our own firebombing raids over Japan, and then the nuclear attacks, were morally problematic for us. We were in a fix, though: winning was not just a matter of getting a trophy, and our forces in the field were facing a tough slog and they needed all the help they could get. Cities are the home of factories and factories are the source of weapons and ammo.
We did try other approaches. The U.S. had this bright idea in 1943 that if we could shut down German refineries, the Germans would grind to a halt. It would have worked but for the fact that the Germans had thought of that too and they were ready for us. A couple of raids on Ploesti where we lost 20+% of the bombers, with a lot of killed and wounded coming home in planes that would have to be written off, taught us that it wasn't that simple.
Today, we have weapons that can get at factories or other infrastructure essentials without such massive collateral damage. That's good, because wanton destruction and killing is wrong and these weapons allow us to spare as much and as many as possible, consistent with breaking what has to be broken because it serves an enemy military purpose.
We also have nuclear weapons, which are the pinnacle of wanton destruction. These really should never be used except in retaliation, and then only if we simply cannot do the job with conventional weapons.
| 583 |
prairiefire Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:00:53pm |
re: #572 reine.de.tout
Photo?
I will post one after Christmas. I don't see any on their website. I bought them when I first saw them awhile back. I have them squirreled away until I need a present for me.
| 584 |
SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:02:35pm |
re: #429 garhighway
She's questioning the administration's incompetence? Doesn't that mean she thinks it is competent?
You know, it's not that I don't think that some pretty serious questions should be asked about where this stuff is coming from.
It's just that Sarah Palin's not exactly the person to be asking them.
| 585 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:03:02pm |
re: #583 prairiefire
I will post one after Christmas. I don't see any on their website. I bought them when I first saw them awhile back. I have them squirreled away until I need a present for me.
You've a stronger will than i...i can't shoe-shop for myself if i'm not going to be able to wear them immediately.
| 586 |
SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:04:52pm |
re: #472 BigPapa
Hannity and others keep saying 'clear and present danger' about Wikileaks. As deplorable and wrong as what they did I have a feeling wingnuts may start talking of 'taking out' Assange.
A lot of people out there like talking about 'taking out' people. It makes them feel all tough and realpoliticky.
| 587 |
SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:06:55pm |
re: #500 Fozzie Bear
I prefer bad catholic girls to good christian women.
There is a Mennonite heroine of a mystery series who refers frequently in each book to her 'solid Christian underwear'.
| 588 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:09:03pm |
re: #587 SanFranciscoZionist
There is a Mennonite heroine of a mystery series who refers frequently in each book to her 'solid Christian underwear'.
LOLWTF!
the best women's underwear is decidedly heathen and insubstantial.
| 589 |
prairiefire Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:10:17pm |
re: #585 Aceofwhat?
You've a stronger will than i...i can't shoe-shop for myself if i'm not going to be able to wear them immediately.
A gal's gotta do what a gal's gotta do. I swooned when I saw them, but I couldn't justify the expense for the monthly budget, at the time. So, I worked it out in my head. : )
| 590 |
prairiefire Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:10:35pm |
re: #588 Fozzie Bear
LOLWTF!
the best women's underwear is decidedly heathen and insubstantial.
And uncomfortable!
| 591 |
Fozzie Bear Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:11:16pm |
re: #590 prairiefire
And uncomfortable!
That's why it is best to remove it at the first possible opportunity!
| 592 |
Aceofwhat? Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:12:34pm |
re: #589 prairiefire
A gal's gotta do what a gal's gotta do. I swooned when I saw them, but I couldn't justify the expense for the monthly budget, at the time. So, I worked it out in my head. : )
oh that is SO familiar...my wife does similar contortions with our budget...hilarious
| 593 |
engineer cat Mon, Nov 29, 2010 4:19:29pm |
re: #565 Killgore Trout
Soros, Van Jones and Obama released the wikileaks documents for a Czechoslovakian style communist takeover.
with help from elvis' alien love child
Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory Just Captured Ominous Signals About the Planet’s Health Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory just captured an ominous sign about the pace of global warming. Atmospheric levels of planet-warming carbon dioxide aren’t just on their way to yet another record high this year - they’re rising faster than ever, ...
Cheechako
The Good Liars at the Schnecksville Trump Rally [VIDEO] New theories, great tunes and SHOCKING breaking news. SUPPORT US: http://Herohero.co/thegoodliars SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!WASHINGTON D.C. MAY 23RD: https://www.unionstage.com/shows/good-liars-fix-america/NASHVILLE, TN JUNE 6TH: https://www.etix.com/ticket/p/42992972/the-good-liars-nashville-the-lab-at-zaniesSAN FRANCISCO, CA JUNE 25TH: https://www.livenation.com/event/G5vYZbavGvggG/the-good-liars SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-good-liars-tell-the-truth/id1731178442Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7mgfiwzr32907N4y68eFOCJoin this channel ...
teleskiguy
Trump’s “Stolen Election” Lie Based on Evidence From Pervy Bathroom Cam-Spy OK, this really takes the cake. If you have relatives that still cling to the “election was stolen, dadgum, I jes’ KNOW IT … This should be a slight remedy to the stubborn madness Thanks to online anonymity, the ...
Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
Best of April 2024 Nothing new here but these are a look back at the a few good images from the past month. Despite the weather, I was quite pleased with several of them. These were taken with older lenses (made from the ...
William Lewis
Gateway Pundit, Sued by Election Workers, Declares BankruptcyA onetime favorite, now just pathetic figure around these parts, Jim Hoft aka SMOTI ("Stupidest Man On The Internet"), has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in response to the defamation lawsuits filed against him to the same election workers that ... Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ... Cheechako
A Water War Is Brewing Between the U.S. And Mexico. Here’s Why A water dispute between the United States and Mexico that goes back decades is turning increasingly urgent in Texas communities that rely on the Rio Grande. Their leaders are now demanding the Mexican government either share water or face ... Cheechako
Harper’s Magazine: Slippery Slope - How Private Equity Shapes a Ski Town …Big Sky stands apart for other reasons. The obvious distinction is the Yellowstone Club, a private resort hidden in the mountains above the community that Justin Farrell, a professor of sociology at Yale and the author of Billionaire Wilderness, ... teleskiguy
