Slashdot Mirror

Your problem with physics is not my problem. Seriously.

https://consortiumnews.com/201...

*sigh*

I'm guessing this is what you mean by "physics"

July 5, 2016: In the early evening, Eastern Daylight Time, someone working in the EDT time zone with a computer directly connected to the DNC server or DNC Local Area Network, copied 1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds onto an external storage device. That speed is much faster than what is physically possible with a hack.

It thus appears that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 (the self-proclaimed WikiLeaks source) was not a hack by Russia or anyone else, but was rather a copy of DNC data onto an external storage device.

Which is an misunderstanding of stupidly interpreted evidence.

There's no evidence of the files being transferred off the DNC servers at 22mb/s, there's evidence of the files being written at 22mb/s on July 5th.

Which is more than a month older than the oldest email!!!!!

You're not looking at the timestamp of the hack, you're looking at the timestamp of putting the files on a USB for Wikileaks.

Your problem with physics is not my problem. Seriously.

https://consortiumnews.com/201...

I said, tons of evidence of Russia attempting to alter the election, and attempting to coordinate with Trump's team

Zero evidence. Both parties are virulently anti-russian and have been for over a century. Even the self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders has been onboard Russiagate from the beginning. It's as stupid as stupid as accusing a gay person of interferring in an election between a homophobic Catholic and a homophobic Baptist. Your preferred choice when dealing with two candidates that hate your guts is going to be "none of the above".

Like Birthers, Lunars, Chem Trailers and other whakjob conspiracy theorists, all you have is a Gish Gallop. That's where you fire off a rapid series of talking points while pretending that volume == substance. But spent a moment scrutinizing any of the talking points and they invariably turn out to be bullshit. Twitter troll farm? Bullshit. Russian NRA spy? Bullshit. Russia hacked the DNC emails? Bullshit.

Bullshit.
Bullshit.
Bullshit.
And more Bullshit. Rinse, wash and repeat.

Conflating this with McCarthyism is disgusting, and you know it.

Lulz. Russians, Russians, everywhere! Russians in your utility grids, Russians in your voting machines, Russians in Black Lives Matter! Russians controlling the White House with a manchurian candidate! So many Russians we have to accept mass government-directed corporate censorship of the internet! But yeah, this is nothing like McCarthyism. Oregon has lots of rivers, but have you tried kayaking down De Nile?

Huh? The Special Investigation was launched a long time ago due to an undeniable act of obstruction of justice.

Huh? You can only have obstruction of justice after the fact. Not before. It's like if your local police department got a warrant out on you for resisting arrest - when there's no warrant out and no one has tried to arrest you. Ever.

Breach of the emoluments clause is going to require the third branch of government to do something about.

Uh, no. Removing a president from office is purely up to the legislative branch. It's telling, though, that you poo-pooh an actual violation of the Constitution from Trump, instead of your stupid McCarthyite conspiracy theories.

You're well aware that Mitt was talking about militarily.

You're well aware that's laughable. Democrats have been calling the hack of the DNC emails (actually leaks) a 'digital Pearl Harbor' from Russia for years now. All these supposed attacks on American democracy and that of its allies, but none if it is military? However you want to rationalize the fact you're in the same boat as Mitt Romney. And a bunch of Lunars, Chem Trailers and Birthers.

The world is not evil. Turn off CNN, Fox, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT, the comedy news, just turn them all off. They are not news. They are propaganda.

Start looking for sites like Consortium News, Truthdig, WSWS, Counterpunch, etc.

VIPS, headed by NSA whistleblower William Binney, sent a memo to Trump that outlined the issues with the hacking narrative.

Yes there is a lot of bullshit and obfuscation, but the one fact that remains is that the entire basis of the hacking claim comes from the DNC's own paid consultants, Crowdstrike. Somehow this massive conflict of interest rarely ever gets brought up.

Apologies for the delay in replying. So you're not sure whether I'm a Russian stooge. Maybe I'm some kind of sleeper agent who registered to /. almost 20 years ago(see my id).
Or I'm being cleverly lied to. I think the core disagreement is I see the dangers as internal, you as external. And it's a pretty radical disagreement.
I'll put it this way. I think you're a bit presumptuous about knowing the Americans. You're dismissing everyone who doesn't buy into the mainstream stories as either a Russian stooge or as gullible and manipulated by the Russians.
It means for instance that you'll dismiss every politically aware libertarian. It means, since the job of a journalist as a member of the 'fourth estate' should be to distrust the government, that you disqualify every critical journalist. Well there aren't that many.
Some of these journalists have a political orientation towards the libertarian or the paleoconservative side (think Cato Institute or 'The American Conservative').
Others like Glenn Greenwald and Seymour Hersh are left oriented. But they share a distrust of official claims , even if they simply think it's their job as a journalist.
You don't have to believe they are right to believe that they have sincere informed opinions. I mentioned Consortium News.
There is a lot of criticism there of Russiagate. So are they liars or are they themselves gullible people being lied to?
You can even start by believing they are locked up in group think. That happens enough.

I also think the truth often comes out. But that doesn't mean you'll believe it. What if you consider it Russian Propaganda?
https://consortiumnews.com/201...
The article says the devastating claims of the Department of Homeland Security 2 years ago were bogus.
They were believed though and they lent credibility to a lot of followup claims, including additional claims by DHS themselves.

If Russian propaganda is not entirely stupid they'll take the arguments of these people and amplify them. But nobody does all out propaganda like the US.
That's one thing you got right overall but I'll rephrase it for you in a way that probably makes more sense to foreigners.
Americans are very nice, but it's very easy to manipulate them into supporting aggressive policies by danging an external threat in front of them.
Frankly though, I don't see why that should be limited to Americans.

Does that mean there is no threat at all? Not necessarily. Does that mean the adversaries are actually nice people? Not at all.
But it means that in a functioning democracy internal distrust is essential. When the mainstream press is starting to trust official sources it's dead.
So in a functioning democracy it's not easy to get the people lined up behind wars and foreign aggression. Apparently your priorities are different.

[Russia] hacked DNC emails

So we're continuously told by those with an obvious conflict of interest, against a mounting pile of evidence to the contrary.

Current WH staff setting up their own private accounts after the election to use for White House business was not a notable issue. It went away in a few days.
https://www.politico.com/story...

The Bush WH staff using a private server for WH communications during the sell-job for the Iraq War in 2002-2003, and then wiping the server, deleting 22 million emails rather than hand any over to the government records office, was not an issue. It went away in a few days at the time, and again in a few days during the 2016 election when Newsweek magazine attempted to revive the story:

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/0...

No, I am not waving my arms around crying conspiracy. The press really did harp on the HRC email story, some 30X as much coverage as "issues" got; but the thing is, people kept clicking on the stories; and not changing channels; and the press responds to that.

I really don't understand it and don't have a theory for why Americans are so fascinated with the slightest wrongs done by Democrats (I mean, FIVE investigations of Clinton firings in the WH travel office??) and so uninterested in the most jaw-dropping things done by the right, but they just are. I think Al Franken had it right, that the only press bias is a "sell eyeballs to advertisers" bias and the unfairness of it all must be laid at the feet of The People themselves. Truly, Americans have the government they deserve.

Here's my two "greatest hits" on that score:
1) Nixon's collusion with a foreign power (S. Vietnam) to ruin the 1968 Peace Talks to deny Democrats a win during the election campaign was called treason by some who became aware of his calls to them via CIA wiretaps:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0... ...20,000 Americans died in the ensuing four years. (NB: Might have happened either way; but Nixon's *intent* was to extend the war.)

2) Eight news organizations paid to have the Florida ballots carefully and repeatedly recounted and found that Gore won no matter how you counted hanging chads and dimples and all that:

https://www.consortiumnews.com... ...the Washington Post put that story on page a10 and it was gone in a few days. I was actually unaware of it, and I'm a news junkie.

So that's what will happen to this story too. I don't know why it works this way with American news, but it does.

Both those links come from Jon Schwarz' eye-opening history in The Intercept last December:
https://theintercept.com/2017/... ...where Schwarz dryly notes that:
"For their part, the elite print and broadcast media accepted the right’s critique that they were – as huge profit-driven corporations naturally tend to be – horribly liberal. " ...and I'm sure that's part of it. But the news media can't control stories all THAT well. People really do just look away after a few days, from Republican malfeasance, all the way up to torture. Heck, Democrats look away from it, including Obama looking the other way on torture.

So this is nothing, and will be gone in a few days. QED. I'm willing to lay money on it if anybody is skeptical.

The FBI et al might have been investigating the links between the Trump campaign and Russia, but the only campaign intentionally attacked was Clinton's. Did you forget that?

You know who is more credible that the collective whole of the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and their sympathizers in the intelligence agencies? It's NSA whistleblower William Benny and his associates at the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, when they say there's no proof the DNC was hacked.

But sure, pretend the DNC is the problem.

They are the driving force behind this misinformation campaign, and even their namesake is a lie.

Exactly :

https://consortiumnews.com/201... /beware-of-white-helmets-bearing-news/

Linus created an operating system, while Trump got caught committing treason colluding with a foreign hostile adversary's attack on our democracy.

I don't see the comparison.

Trump is going to prison.

Linus is a good person.

Nearly right!

Linus created an operating system

Linus wrote a kernel. Most of the rest of Linux distributions comes from elsewhere, hence the preferred title GNU/Linux.

while Trump got caught committing treason

No he didn't. If you think otherwise, please give details of what exactly he did and why it is legally treasonous.

treason
n noun
1 (also high treason) the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.
2 (petty treason) historical the crime of murdering a master or husband.

colluding with a foreign hostile adversary's attack on our democracy.

collude
n verb come to a secret agreement in order to deceive others; conspire.

Governments (like corporations) always collude; in terms of foreign policy, they do little else. But what is this "foreign hostile adversary"? (a multiply redundant expression, by the way). Russia is in no way hostile to the USA, and the only way in which it is an adversary is that it competes in trade - which is what capitalism enjoins - and sometimes declines to do what the US government orders it to do.

Needless to say, there was no "attack on our democracy". First because there was obviously no "attack", and second because there is obviously no "democracy".

https://www.thenation.com/arti...
https://consortiumnews.com/201...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.strategic-culture....
https://scholar.princeton.edu/...
yournewswire.com/jimmy-carter-the-u-s-is-completely-subverted-by-oligarchs/

Trump is going to prison.

No, he isn't.

It is outrageous and so are most /. posts about it.
There still is some antidote being published though.
Today: https://consortiumnews.com/201...

I never liked Freedom House or National Endowment of Democracy.

https://consortiumnews.com/201...
The new bandwagon/scapegoat is Fake News = Social Media = Russia. It's all hype and deception.

This should not be modded troll. It actually addresses a crucial question: where's the meat? When an authoritative report supports a claim one should think twice. But that is also what good journalists should do: challenge the report. They do it, mostly outside of the mainstream, sometimes in it. And the report is very weak and does not represent the intelligence community to the extent it claims. One recent analysis is from Scott Ritter: https://consortiumnews.com/201... .

So one can say the FBI, CIA, NSA are not really 'in' but the chiefs of FBI and CIA are. The(now former) DNI predictably is , that's James Clapper. NSA chief is not in. NSA assessment listed in the report is 'moderate'. That means 'it's possible'. And they're the experts. So they're being polite. Coincidentally Clapper has asked for replacement of the NSA chief.

I'm uncomfortable with the designation 'conspiracy theory'. I would call it a negotiated position. A lot of people want to get rid of Trump, and some of them for very good reasons. Russiagate is the solution that's offered (originally by the Clinton team). What do you do? Go for truth?
I'd go for truth for multiple reasons. One reason is that I think concern for truth has dropped to dangerously low levels. And another is that I think the offer of Russiagate is a bad deal. It satisfies the hawks, and it may even lead to the warmongers leading with Trump still in place.

Now one still can judge a story like the Pokemon one independently. This one appears to be built on nothing but it's written because Russiagate leads and it becomes big news because the headline specialists need to beef it up a bit to make it sell. Because everyone just reads headlines there's a constant feeling of 'my god it's even worse than we thought'.

If so you should send me your money before some Nigerian prince steals it from you. The story went from Russia hacking servers and emails, to Russia colluding with Trump, and now we're down to talking about Pokemon and Facebook ads. But Russiagaters have to keep talking about this - if they stop, they'd have to admit they were a million megatons of bullshit crammed into a five pound sack.

https://consortiumnews.com/201...

Yeah... the story isn't actually changing, there's just more chapters.

It's like how when a new woman comes out and accuses Harvey Weinstien of assaulting her people don't go "wait, I thought the story was that Harvey Weinstein sexually assaulted 20 women, now it's claimed he assaulted 21??? The story is changing!! It's all bullshit!!!"

...to send me your life savings?

Actually the hysteria is mounting.

Fixed that for you.

The Russian's hacked power plants storyline was bullshit.
CrowdStrike is bullshit.
The "17 intelligence agencies" line was bullshit.
The Russia hacked election systems is bullshit.

find this report by the Director of National Intelligence particularly interesting

Sure, lets look at this - while remembering the FBI wasn't allowed to examine the DNC servers so how exactly would they have "high confidence" in any thing - but this time noting the weasel words:

We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

Zero evidence provided, only claims and accusations. Well guess what Chem Trailers, Sandy Hook Truthers and Birthers have? Claims and accusations.

Then there's the fact the entire "Russia wanted Trump to win so hacked the election" makes no sense whatsoever. The election was Hillary's to lose, right up until she picked Tim Kaine as her running mate and decided to skip campaigning in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan. So according to the storyline, Putin was crafty enough to dig up dirt on Hillary (which was all true) but dumb enough to collude with someone as dumb as Trump. Which means the CIA, NSA & FBI would know all about it. Which meant Hillary would too, who had already campaigned on shooting down Russian jets in Syria. So what's really going on?

The entire "Russian hacking" storyline is nothing but Swiftboating from Clinton supporters, as she was the candidate who engaged in corrupt collusion with Russian interests to sell a fifth of America's uranium.

And you can skip that Snopes link that handwaives away Hillary's culpability for a number of reasons:
1) Access is corruption
2) Avoiding the appearance of impropriety applies to politicians, not just judges
3) Her own campaign was warned internally that the deal was a political liability for her
4) Hillary flat-out broke her confirmation promises on keeping a wall between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation

At this point, Chem Trailing anti-vaxxer Birther Sandy Hook Truthers have more respectability than Russiagaters.

If so you should send me your money before some Nigerian prince steals it from you. The story went from Russia hacking servers and emails, to Russia colluding with Trump, and now we're down to talking about Pokemon and Facebook ads. But Russiagaters have to keep talking about this - if they stop, they'd have to admit they were a million megatons of bullshit crammed into a five pound sack.

https://consortiumnews.com/201...

Well, evidence points to social media advertising being exceedingly effective this past election.

They were even more effective than you think. I read a few things about the facebook 'campaign' and a large fraction of the ads were published after the election, and some of the ads were showing puppies. That is some seriously advanced reshaping of US politics you have there. https://consortiumnews.com/201...

$100k? That's it?

It might have been as much as $200,000!

Seriously, though, the linked article is quite comprehensive (and long ... if the last 25% is awful, I don't know it yet).

The whole idea of protecting us from bad content stinks. Actually it's outright alarming. Firstly, do we need to be protect the pedophile terrorists that are served as prime safe example of the censorship Google/Facebook/Youtube and others are performing? Secondly it's a very bad idea to protect us from what designated enemies like Russia want us to know, with the policies to eliminate 'fake news'.
Thirdly it's a bad idea to protect us from our own progressive and leftwing activism. A socialist site checked the statistics recently , published here https://www.wsws.org/en/articl...

In the three months since Internet monopoly Google announced plans to keep users from accessing “fake news,” the global traffic rankings of a broad range of left-wing, progressive, anti-war and democratic rights organizations have fallen significantly.

This is not an AI issue. This is the surveillance state telling us what we ought and ought not to be reading. This article is relevant: https://consortiumnews.com/201...

Russiagate fake news.

There is no "Russian collaboration," there never was. It's all a made-up conspiracy theory worthy of as much derision as "pizzagate."

Look how much people buy into these lies. Even Al Franken was bamboozled the "17 agencies" falsehood because the media kept repeating the lie as fact, and Clapper had to correct him twice during testimony that, no, it was actually only three. Russiagate is the same thing.

Evidence and analysis from Intelligence Community veterans clearly lays out the case that the DNC emails were much more likely a leak than a hack. It's possible that the only source of evidence that Russians were involved, Crowdstrike, a partisan group, simply made it look that way.

The article's central message is plausible: Russia running a cyberwar against Ukraine and at the same time trying to build up knowhow. But at the same time the author knows that he can write anything about Russia and it will be believed. At the same time the story is part of a large anti-Russia and anti Trump campaign.

  I don't keep track so I don't have a lot of links ready but I know the news about a russian cyberattack on US powerplant was bogus. Russian hacking of DNC was bogus.Russian-Trump links are bogus. Russian hacking of french elections was bogus. But these debunkings only come through very slowly. On the other side there is a barrage of claims that is so overwhelming nobody can begin to debunk them.

And I see good reasons why the democrats and the military industrical complex prefer to have high tensions with Russia and why they want to blame Russia for the failed elections. And I see why the press goes along with it.

And I think that whatever Russia is doing(a lot less than claimed, but certainly a lot of business as usual nasty stuff) it's a good idea to improve the ties with them rather than deteriorate them. That is my opinion about policy. That it's in the west's interest. I also think they're open for chances for improvement , at least as long as Putin is there.

But look at this thread. It's almost unanimous against Russia. Any outsider looking here without any knowledge of the situation would know, this is bad. It means no good thinking will come out of it.(there's more reasons for that though). It also means propaganda is still very effective here and now.

So the article of the topic here may have a good degree of truth, but it's all part of an anti-russian frenzy which I think is a very bad idea.

Here's a new link about a lot of the hacking stories. It covers quite some ground. I'd have to dig for the rest. The ones I mentioned are some I'm pretty certain of although one can debate how convincing the proof is.
https://consortiumnews.com/201...

I didn't discuss Trump. I'd like to get rid of him but I'm convinced the current campaign to link him to Russia is extremely dishonest. He's right about that. Maybe he'll go down because in his efforts to stop them he'll do something very illegal. Or maybe he'll stay in power because he made the right friends. The Saudis and the weapons manufacturers for instance. Then all that the anti Russia campaign will have achieved is to give us the worst of both worlds. Thanks for cooperating everyone.

This guy has to be a hired psyop. Everyone knows the US spent billions to fuck up Ukraine.

US spent $5 billion to destabilize Ukraine The United States spent $5 billion on Ukraine anti-government riots Neocons and the Ukraine Coup U.S. Admits It Spent 5 Billion to Overthrow Ukraine Victoria Nuland's Admits Washington Has Spent $5 Billion to "Subvert Ukraine" Nuland: Fuck the EU

The US spent billions to overthrow an elected president in Ukraine, created riots. Now Joe Biden's runs Ukraine's oil companies.

Did you even read your own links?

"That’s a distorted understanding of remarks given by a State Department official. She was referring to money spent on democracy-building programs in Ukraine since it broke off from the Soviet Union in 1991.

We rate the claim Pants on Fire."

This guy has to be a hired psyop.
Everyone knows the US spent billions to fuck up Ukraine.

US spent $5 billion to destabilize Ukraine
The United States spent $5 billion on Ukraine anti-government riots
Neocons and the Ukraine Coup
U.S. Admits It Spent 5 Billion to Overthrow Ukraine
Victoria Nuland's Admits Washington Has Spent $5 Billion to "Subvert Ukraine"
Nuland: Fuck the EU

The US spent billions to overthrow an elected president in Ukraine, created riots.
Now Joe Biden's runs Ukraine's oil companies.

The bigger fish they should be frying should be the "crippling construction defects" affecting their newer ships other than focusing on minor issues like vaping in my opinion.

There's a good reason she and Scalia were such good friends. Despite almost polar opposite politics, there were few others in the world that were their intellectual equal.

Except: Scalia was a hack. And an idiot. He routinely engaged in reasoning that he would have flipped shit over if it came from another judge. Just one example:

"In 1868, when the 39th Congress was debating and ultimately proposing the Fourteenth Amendment, I don't think anybody would have thought that equal protection applied to sex discrimination, or certainly not to sexual orientation," Scalia said in an interview with the legal magazine California Lawyer.

"So does that mean that we've gone off in error by applying the Fourteenth Amendment to both? Yes, yes. Sorry, to tell you that."

However, if the "original intent" of the amendment's drafters was so determinative that the Fourteenth Amendment supposedly was only meant to apply to black men at the end of slavery it might be safe to assume that the drafters weren't thinking about protecting a white man like George W. Bush from possibly losing an election in Florida in 2000.

Yet, the Fourteenth Amendment was precisely what Scalia and four other partisan Republicans on the Supreme Court cited to justify shutting down the Florida recount and handing the White House to Bush, despite the fact that he lost the national popular vote and apparently would have come out on the short end of the Florida recount if all legally cast ballots were counted.

You'd think that, but they've developed a bad case of stockholm syndrome since he won the primary.

The neocons are mostly supporting Clinton. Her foreign policy is very like the neocons. The consummate Neocons, the Kagans, have even endorsed Hillary Clinton.

Fear not, the Clintons have made 'getting in on the act' their career. Bill Clinton picked up the neocon script back in 1998, stating that Iraq had WMD and Saddam had to be deposed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Some reading about Hillary's favorite neocons (having become one herself):

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06...
https://consortiumnews.com/201...

US says ‘no evidence of Russia’s direct involvement’

** Russian provided BUK-M1... then captured BUK from Ukraine army. There is also BUK driver "released" from separatists confirmed that (Where is he now??).

** No Russian involvement, so how separatist could launch the BUK. New theory:
http://touch.latimes.com/#sect...

U.S. intelligence agencies have so far been unable to determine the nationalities or identities of the crew that launched the missile. U.S. officials said it was possible the SA-11 was launched by a defector from the Ukrainian military who was trained to use similar missile systems.

Robert Parry confirmed that: https://consortiumnews.com/201...

2+3. Unverifiable. Also, fake photo, provided by SBU (Ukraine security agency), which claimed BUK no.312 launched missile downed the MH-17, is still in Ukraine service:
http://rt.com/news/174868-ukra...
http://web.archive.org/web/201...
http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/cont...

The last photo was **DELETED** (silently).
The first photo, is interesting too.
This is the first, and **ONLY** photo which captured the smoke-trail of missile, provided by a pro-Kiev "witness", here some analysis from Dutch blogger (he may be hired by Kremlin, but his logic is interesting):
http://7mei.nl/2015/05/18/mh17...

Here some fact:
* This is the **ONLY** photo about smoke-trail, despite several video from locals capture the moment of the planed burning.
* The photo was in BMP, no EXIF data (Bellingcats to "protect" the "witness", yes here have contact with pro-Kiev medias, blogger, too)
* His interviews contradicted themselves.
* Minor detail, the blogger of 7meil.nl wen to the room of "witness", taken a photo as "witness" described, and there is (electric) wires in photo, not like the "original" photo.

4. After the incident, locals, in some videos, cheering because they thought government airplane shot down. May be, the separatists think so, too.

5. Which satellite images!?
IF satellite images provided by Russian Government after the accident, there not claim that is fake (yet).
Meanwhile, the satellite images provided by Ukraine Government, to counter the Russian ones, was analyzed by Russians, that was faked

UN says US violating international law, calls for closure of Guantanamo
US Attack On Syria Violates International Law
US drone strikes violate international law, harm civilians: Amnesty and HRW (VIDEO)
NATO Violates International Law
US: Prolonged Indefinite Detention Violates International Law
UN says US drone war in Pakistan violates international law
The Military Admitted Force-Feeding Gitmo Detainees Violates International Law and Medical Ethics
US violates int’l laws; moves USS Enterprise into Pakistani water near Balochistan
International community concerned America violating international law by striking Syria
Americans Abandon International Law

Whether they realize it or not, Americans are increasingly embracing policies that undermine the international rule of law, with self-identified liberals, in particular, seemingly reversing their positions on matters such as the Guantanamo prison camp, extrajudicial assassinations and arbitrary detention.

A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, for example, found that 70 percent of the American public approves of the U.S. government’s decision to indefinitely keep the Guantanamo prison open, despite widespread international condemnation of this policy.

America's modern left often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because it's old and was written by white dudes. Here's a (fairly calm) piece that explores that argument. (Also look up "constitution living document".)

"Is the Constitution Still Relevant?"
http://consortiumnews.com/2013...

Unfortunately, this isn't just a fringe belief: in 2010 a USA Today poll showed that 1 in 4 people no longer though the Constitution was "relevant"
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

By mongering against "the Left" you are opening yourself to being manipulated by wealthy elites (who really don't care about left or right, just more power and money at our expense).

The real dichotomy is the .01% vs the rest of us - the haves vs. the have-nots.

America's modern left often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because it's old and was written by white dudes. Here's a (fairly calm) piece that explores that argument. (Also look up "constitution living document".)

"Is the Constitution Still Relevant?"

  http://consortiumnews.com/2013... [consortiumnews.com]

Unfortunately, this isn't just a fringe belief: in 2010 a USA Today poll showed that 1 in 4 people no longer though the Constitution was "relevant"

  http://usatoday30.usatoday.com... [usatoday.com]

I think you mean the right. Republicans have been trampling on the constitution since 2001. The terrorists have won.

America's modern left often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because it's old and was written by white dudes. Here's a (fairly calm) piece that explores that argument. (Also look up "constitution living document".)

"Is the Constitution Still Relevant?"
http://consortiumnews.com/2013...

Unfortunately, this isn't just a fringe belief: in 2010 a USA Today poll showed that 1 in 4 people no longer though the Constitution was "relevant"
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

And America's modern right often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because CommunistsXXXXXX terrorists.

America's modern left often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because it's old and was written by white dudes. Here's a (fairly calm) piece that explores that argument. (Also look up "constitution living document".)

"Is the Constitution Still Relevant?"
http://consortiumnews.com/2013...

Unfortunately, this isn't just a fringe belief: in 2010 a USA Today poll showed that 1 in 4 people no longer though the Constitution was "relevant"
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

Hell, they even burned people alive:

http://consortiumnews.com/2014...

All sorts of crimes were done, almost none of them reported by the western media. The burning alive one was too large, and too many people recorded it, for them to outright ignore it though.

Noam Chomsky:
If the media were honest, they would say, Look, here are the interests we represent and this is the framework within which we look at things. This is our set of beliefs and commitments. That’s what they would say, very much as their critics say. For example, I don’t try to hide my commitments, and the Washington Post and New York Times shouldn’t do it either. However, they must do it, because this mask of balance and objectivity is a crucial part of the propaganda function. In fact, they actually go beyond that. They try to present themselves as adversarial to power, as subversive, digging away at powerful institutions and undermining them. The academic profession plays along with this game.

Haha, while RT never tried to hide they are government-funded, and their intentions. Others like what Chomsky description.

Even BBC is biased now, they just better than others because of their skill of using well played words to make their reports looked neutral.

But, I must agree, RT is propaganda outlet which made bogus "report", this's just an example. Or, claims there is no neo-Nazi in Ukraine, or trying to dismiss the role of these "patriot"

Noam Chomsky:
If the media were honest, they would say, Look, here are the interests we represent and this is the framework within which we look at things. This is our set of beliefs and commitments. That’s what they would say, very much as their critics say. For example, I don’t try to hide my commitments, and the Washington Post and New York Times shouldn’t do it either. However, they must do it, because this mask of balance and objectivity is a crucial part of the propaganda function. In fact, they actually go beyond that. They try to present themselves as adversarial to power, as subversive, digging away at powerful institutions and undermining them. The academic profession plays along with this game.

Haha, while RT never tried to hide they are government-funded, and their intentions. Others like what Chomsky description.

Even BBC is biased now, they just better than others because of their skill of using well played words to make their reports looked neutral.

But, I must agree, RT is propaganda outlet which made bogus "report", this's just an example. Or, claims there is no neo-Nazi in Ukraine, or trying to dismiss the role of these "patriot"

Careful, you might not be aware of who the idiots really are:

Warning Merkel on Russian ‘Invasion’ Intel

It's ironic that propaganda is used as a bases to call out something else as propaganda.

e.g.

http://consortiumnews.com/2014...

I'd rather believe this article by Robert Parry (THE journalist who reported Iran Contra scandal in 80s) than mainstream media propaganda where authors don't even dare to sign them with their own names.

This is far too early to judge as investigation didn't even start. All western media are jumping to conclusion as soon as possible and pointing fingers at Putin. Those screaming and pointing fingers should be investigated first as they're usualy suspects. Every police handbook tells it.

http://consortiumnews.com/2014... is an interesting read. The authors though, do need some practice at diplomatic writing; it would be easier to take seriously if the snide remarks weren't snuck in there.

As interesting as Snowden is, this is a distraction from the more important (and probably more urgent) question of... when are the criminals at the NSA going to be brought to justice?

Also, when do we fire the people that sold out our actual spy talent - with their far more targeted, far more 4th Amendment compatible tools like THINTHREAD - instead of continuing to give a paycheck to the assholes that let 9/11 happen so they could keep funneling money to their contractor friends to develop the far more expensive TRAILBLAZER? The families of the victims that died do this willful neglegence will probably want to file civil lawsuits, too.

A cornerstone of the very idea of "justice" is equal protection before the law, and these people need to get their day in court. If they do, then maybe we can start to put this feckless imbroglio behind us and move on, with only the usual political drama to worry about.

On the other hand, if we fail to accomplish this task - if we fail to obtain some basic symbol that the Constitution is still respected as the highest law of the land - then we've really given up any last pretense that this is any kind of civilized nation with a social contract.

The US has had this at a mil/gov level since about the late 1960's under ideas like the Community On-line Intelligence System.
PROMIS showed what networked law enforcement had in the 1970s and 80s.
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/07/11/prisms-controversial-forerunner/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/18/patriot_games was the hint at what could be done US wide.
Another scary part is telling the pubic about using a lock box for generations of calls.

Ugh.

So people have bought then, hook, line, etc., the total lie that Assad used gas on his own people. He didn't.

http://thiscantbehappening.net/node/1958

http://rt.com/news/turkey-syria-chemical-weapons-850/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2418378/Syrian-hostage-Domenico-Quirico-overheard-rebels-blame-Damascus-chemical-attacks.html

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/504735/20130909/syria-chemical-attack-assad-rebels-blame-hostage.htm

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/08/syria-chemical-weapons-not-assad-bild

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/06/syri-j13.html

http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

http://consortiumnews.com/2013/09/06/obama-warned-on-syrian-intel/

http://www.voltairenet.org/article180149.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-military-and-intelligence-officials-to-obama-assad-not-responsible-for-chemical-attack/5348576

http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/29/verify-chemical-weapons-use-before-unleashing-the-dogs-of-war/

The mid 1980's where a fun time in US computer history, US domestic needs and digital file tracking.
You had the Church report so no domestic operation/unit/task force really ever wanted any unique keywords used again.
You also had an interesting funding mix and database upgrades - many connecting to each other for the first time or been able to be searched via a network and the results combined - cases/city/state/federal/telco.
The results where hinted at in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Core
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/07/11/prisms-controversial-forerunner/ (late 1970s early 80s to bring DoJ criminal case management)
that seemed to allow http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/18/patriot_games

Re: bypass the FISA courts.
Thats the idea of the 'cloud' vision - every system on the same network with an understanding of how to get the data out in realtime.
Where the NSA seemed to have problems is the need for some legal domestic front cover e.g. FBI to be the name on their pipe.
With a system like this, so many groups get legal data, the NSA will never have to wait, be dependant on one stream again.
ie privacy will work both ways - nobody will really know who is getting the data 'out' just that the "credential management" worked. It seems to be a new vision of an older idea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutor's_Management_Information_System
More at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.01/inslaw.html?topic=&topic_set=
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/07/11/prisms-controversial-forerunner/
Welcome to a very legal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Core

• 1) Manipulate social media accounts to troll the movement apart. Down-votes are fairly effective at removing data. http://www.infowars.com/us-military-caught-manipulating-social-media-running-mass-propaganda-accounts/
• 2) Parallel construction using the database of possible crimes they assembled above. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-laundering
• 3) Blackmail using data collected http://consortiumnews.com/2013/06/21/bushs-foiled-nsa-blackmail-scheme/
• 4) Allegations of affairs, rape, and sexual deviance whether true of false tend to destroy people. Support of Assange decreased after his allegations that came out right after he released his material. We have seen Generals outed by the intelligence community for having affairs, its possible there is something there.
• 5) Apparently you can also harass their spouses when they are traveling.
• 6) Most of the stuff done under COINTELPRO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

Boom. A system to take out the subversives. All without people suspecting.

The latest evidence of a history-changing Republican dirty trick in 1980 and its precursor in 1968. (For earlier articles about the October Surprise mystery, go to “Archives” at the Home Page and click on ”October Surprise X-Files.”) Second Thoughts on October Surprise: New evidence has shaken the confidence of former Rep. Lee Hamilton in his two-decade-old judgment clearing Ronald Reagan’s 1980 campaign of going behind President Carter’s back to frustrate his efforts to free 52 U.S. hostages in Iran, the so-called October Surprise case, Robert Parry reports. What a Real Cover-up Looks Like: Republicans won’t let go of their conspiracy theory about some nefarious “cover-up” in “talking points” for Ambassador Susan Rice’s TV interviews on the Benghazi attack. But they should at least have better skills for detecting a real cover-up, since they’ve had direct experience, as Robert Parry documents.

"How they came to that conclusion is a secret."

It does seem to run contrary to how they behaved before they had much power.

The NSA has every conversation they have made since ~2000 recorded and analyzed. You can see from this article that the NSA has been interested in controlling politics with blackmail for some time.

Just the Mediterranean. The problem is the Euro: countries who's economy is based on exporting industrial products are helped by it because the other countries drag the value of their currency down, and those other countries - who's economy is typically based on tourism - are harmed because the industrial countries drag their currency up. The result is a trade imbalance within the EU, and those usually end up with someone bankrupt.

This could all be solved easily if all the countries got their own currencies back and let them float freely relative to each other, in which case the imbalances would tend to re-balance themselves. We could even retain the Euro as something all the central banks are guaranteed to buy at current market value in exchange of the country's own currency. As is, the solution we are doing now is simply moving money from the industrial north to the tourist south, which works somewhat but makes the northerners angry and demanding austerity from the south, which in turn makes the south suffer even more.

In any case, this is a completely different case from the US, which really is bankrupt as a whole as a result of decades of mismanagement and several extremely costly wars. Oh, and it's also plagued by a two-party system where one party is a bunch of spineless wimps, while the other is a bunch of crazy religiously zealous sodomites who worship Satan in all but name (pick an issue, any issue; the Republicans will always be on whatever side gets most people screwed over, and specifically thrown in prison, not to mention glorify greed and selfishness) while having a monomaniacal obsession with homosexuality even the most obsessive pervert would be jealous of. In short, it's a miracle it has taken this long for you to begin collapsing, and you won't be rising again anytime soon.

Which is unfortunate, since it leaves China as the next superpower.