Slashdot Mirror
Chelsea Manning Jailed For Refusing To Testify On WikiLeaks (apnews.com)
The Associated Press is reporting that Chelsea Manning, the transgender former Army private who was convicted of passing sensitive government documents to WikiLeaks, "has been sentenced to jail for refusing to testify to a grand jury investigating Wikileaks." From the report: U.S. District Judge Claude Hilton ordered Manning to jail for contempt of court on Friday after a brief hearing in which Manning confirmed she has no intention of testifying. She told the judge she "will accept whatever you bring upon me." Manning has said she objects to the secrecy of the grand jury process, and that she already revealed everything she knows at her court martial. The judge said she will remain jailed until she testifies or until the grand jury concludes its work. Manning's lawyers had asked that she be sent to home confinement instead of the jail, because of medical complications she faces. The judge said U.S. marshals can handle her medical care. Prosecutor Tracy McCormick said the jail and the marshals have assured the government that her medical needs can be met.
I think it's very telling that both under a strident Democratic administration, and now a Republican one, that the investigation and hatred for Wikileaks is exactly the same. This is why I often maintain there is really very little difference between the two parties...
I do feel sorry for Manning though, sending her to jail and not even letting her be confined to home is bullshit. As Wikileaks has said on Twitter, this is simply an effort to coerce Manning to testify. I think it's sad they can get away with this.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Help me out here. IANAL, so I don't really know for sure. But she was pardoned. That means she can't take the fifth in any deposition related to her Wikileaks actions, but she is immune. I don't think it would matter if new information came out. So why is she refusing to talk to the Grand Jury?
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
She is a Traitor to the country. This isn't because of any party loyalty. These were classified documents which she was working on as a member of the military. She chose to be in the military, and work in an area that had such access. This is different then Snowden who was a civilian consultant and wasn't given a way to report illegal actives. Or Assange who isn't an American Citizen.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
They diverge in some regards but it pretty much any way that matters, both sides look out for power in DC.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Technically any German that sent classified documents to the Allies would be a Traitor. What's more important, loyalty or morals?
I don't really care for Manning but history will look fondly on this.
piece of trash why? by providing evidence of the crimes against humanity and the ACTUAL COST OF WAR to all involved? ...if you're struggling with that, i think you're suffering from cognitive dissonance from being so thoroughly brainwashed.
Genocide? Of whom? And the video Manning leaked was deliberately misrepresented by Assange to boost his own ego, as others in WikiLeaks have stated.
What's particularly bad about this is Manning was leaking information with the specific intent to cause harm to the Army, (possibly leading to the deaths of US soldiers) without being aware of its contents at all. Manning did this purely out of spite; it had nothing to do with whistleblowing. The reason he did this goes back to his early days in the Army. Read on:
https://huwieler.net/2017/01/1...
Nothing would make Manning more happy than to see his comrades die simply because he was deliberately an asshole in basic. As an Army veteran myself, I have zero sympathy for that stupid fuck.
Wikileaks is just as it is, a place that broadcasts leaked information. Its problem is often leaked information isn't complete, and often parts of classified documents that really should be classified can now hurt people.
Now most of the stuff leaked was stuff we already knew about or at least assume it happened unless you just into the American propaganda. They were some Russian leaks on Wikileaks as well, and leaks from other countries too.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Still a Dude.
What about people born with XX Male Syndrome(physically male with XX), Swyer syndrome(physically female with XY), or 46,XX DSD(physically male with XX)?
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
" As an Army veteran myself, I have zero sympathy for that stupid fuck." - Ok, so how do you feel about a coward who lied 5 times to stay out of his duty to country, and looks down on those who enlisted to serve? (Drumpf the traitor)
I think I read that the longest she can actually be held for this is 18 months. Though it wasn't clear if at the end of 18 months she could be asked again, refuse, and get another 18 months. I know there have been other cases of people being held indefinitely for contempt of court. If memory serves one man was held for a decade or longer regarding an accusation of embezzling money overseas, eventually the judge died and the next judge decided that was enough.
So I fucking understand why the USA government and its assorted minions would be pissed at this individual, as the Wikileaks revelations revealed by Manning made the government look like a bunch of petty, asshat bitches. But come on already, enough is enough...at what point are you violating the fucking double jeopardy protections outlined in the US Constitution, for fuck's sake.
Here's a thought, stop fucking sowing wars and discord across the planet to sell your weaponry, and maybe, just maybe, there wont be this kind of goddamn motivation to reveal your bullshit meddling.
Note to Scott Snowden....the coast is most definitely *not* clear, so stay the fuck wherever you are. You wont be 'prosecuted', rather, you will be persecuted, just like Manning.
She refuses to testify because she doesn't like the secrecy. But then she claims that she's already revealed everything there is to say. And somehow twists this into some sort of idealogical battle? This is a *very* fuzzy headed individual. Sigh. I guess that it's pretty common across the board. Humanity has put rationality in the back seat for the time being.
She won't win this fight unless she's ready to sit out the jail sentence. When a grand jury pulls you up and says "talk" you don't get a say in the matter, unless you're ready to plead the 5th or sit in a jail cell.
She is a Traitor to the country. This isn't because of any party loyalty. These were classified documents which she was working on as a member of the military. She chose to be in the military, and work in an area that had such access. This is different then Snowden who was a civilian consultant and wasn't given a way to report illegal actives. Or Assange who isn't an American Citizen.
Yes, and the Holocaust was both legal and mostly secret too. Your rhetoric discards all morality in favor of laws that corrupt people wrote to give their blood-soaked oil war cover. Every organized atrocity happens because someone carried out orders. You're hounding for people to just do as their told, no matter how blatantly evil it is.
The Iraq war murdered hundreds of thousands of civilians, displaced over a million, and created gulags where torture and rape were carried out in malice by American soldiers against those rounded up indiscriminately in an occupied country. The American people were broadly deceived about the cause of the Iraq War, as they have been for many previous wars waged on behalf of rich people's interest abroad, and our soldiers in particular were lied to about what they put their lives on the line for.
That is morally treasonous, and anyone who disobeyed an order from an official to restore basic human rights is a hero.
I will not hear of traitor from you sadistic authoritarian psychopaths. You're a traitor to humanity regardless of borders. Full stop.
She was pardoned by Obama. This is Trump/Republicans trying to go barround it. Most likely denied questioning to protect herself.
Her sentence was commuted. Obama specifically said he wasn't pardening her, he felt that her sentence was out of proportion to what others had received. He didn't even commute the whole sentence.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Not exactly. In those other states we wouldn't even discussing this because we wouldn't know about it. Or anyone that did would also be in jail... or dead
So you are so incredibly insecure in your identity that you fear nothing more than a person that has made the decision to switch genders? You have a serious problem.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
he US is in the same category ad China, Russia or Nazi Germany.
You're delusional. I suggest you talk to people who lived under the nazi flag. Talk to those who first-hand fought the fights, flew the raids, occupied Germany at the end. I suggest you educate yourself on what WWII Germany was doing, how they did it, and the sheer scale of what was done. Every country has blood on its hand, but WWII Germany was something else. Russia, too. Stalin offed twice as many Russians -- his own people -- than what Hitler did to the Jews and others Not Like Him.
We're not running a machine of death where we feed body upon body by the thousands into the furnaces. No, we just knock over dictators to put another dictator in, one friendly to our interests.
All we have here is a few minor inconveniences. For fuck's sake we can still buy guns with relative ease. And drugs. And cars, bikes, etc etc. We're a fucking paradise, my commie-pinko friend, even when compared to places in the Carribean.
I will fight people like you in the voting booths, now and until I die. You cannot be allowed to win. You have your right to say it, but we have the right to vote your people into oblivion.
And who the fuck modded you +1 anyway? Your post smacks of arrogant ignorance!
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
Let enough time pass and let the current corrupt holders of power be forgotten, and the verdict will just be the second. Because it is the only thing that has a logical base.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
This is different then Snowden who was a civilian consultant and wasn't given a way to report illegal actives
There are lots and lots of ways for a contractor to report illegal activities. And it is a requirement that contractors be briefed on those ways every year.
There are at least 3 paths of reporting that are independent of chain-of-command. They also accept anonymous tips.
"I had nowhere to report it!!" is bullshit designed to make Snowden more appealing after-the-fact.
You can be compelled by the court to testify in a case unrelated to you (other than you being a witness). Refusal to do so is contempt of court, and can result in jail time (not prison). Your desire to protect someone does not override the court's responsibility to get at the truth.
This seems like an odd reason to refuse to comply with the court. Grand jury hearings (they determine if there's sufficient evidence for a case to go to a real trial) act as a shield against government harassing innocents by constantly sending them to trial on frivolous charges. They are frequently held in secret so as not to prejudice potential future jurors, and not to prejudice the public in case there's a determination that there's insufficient evidence (people have this bad habit of assuming that being accused = guilty).
The only other notable case I can think of where someone refused to testify was a reporter who was ordered by a court to give up the name of his anonymous source, and was jailed (for years) under contempt of court. But in that case, the principle of freedom of the press was at stake - people wishing to inform the press anonymously would no longer do so if their anonymity could be stripped by a simple court order.
Question: What would history label a German who sent information to the allies about the Nazi extermination camps?
(We know the German high command would probably label them a traitor and jail them, I'm asking about "history")
No sig today...
The rule of law is alive and well, in the USA, thank goodness. And if you defy a court of law, you will pay a price.
So, Chelsea better get comfortable unless she wants to answer questions.
... certain matters at her trial.
There are other matters that the feds thought were unnecessary to pursue because they already had enough to put her away.
Even the Obama decision did not upset prosecutors. However, the US is gearing up for an Assange trial once Ecuador releases Assange to London.
For that reason, additional actions by Manning, declared moot at the time, are now important to the Assange trial.
Those same facts would also incriminate Manning and expose her to possible further litigation. I predict an immunity deal for her.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Because if Stalin had actually killed 40 millions
12 million, wsn't it? where did you get 40 from?
Still. Way to endear yourself to your people, killing your own. Niiiicely done.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
Fortunately, like White Supremacists, Neo-Nazis, and other hate groups, you are ineffectively intolerant and misguided.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Well we can Strawman this. But just saying you are morally obligated to break a law, is really a cop out. If Manning had a moral objection to what she was doing, she should had quit. Now the difference was if in Germany if you put in an objection you could be killed, so one was forced to do what they find morally wrong.
Historians will look fondly at this, mainly because they have more documents to study. However so far, most of the content isn't that ground breaking, it isn't like she uncovered America doing grossly evil thing, but just bureaucratic quieting of the level of harm they are doing during a war, that is greater then what they tell the media.
The biggest news on the leak is how humdrum most of the information is anyways, and why do we feel like we need to classify such humdrum information. That is the biggest part of the leak.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Details?
The worse I heard, is that there was a higher civilian causality count then reported. And some cases where Solders being less then professional and performing some bad crimes (outside the chain of command) which was covered up.
We know this stuff happens during war.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I don't like how this process works, you testify or else. You can take the 5th and not testify, but you cannot pick and choose your questions. It's all or nothing, so as soon as you answer ONE question, you have no choice, even a question like "What is your name?" is enough.
That being said, Manning has competent legal counsel and immunity from prosecution for any possibly related crimes, so there is no pleading the 5th. But if you refuse to testify, jail is the result. Manning knows that, Manning's legal counsel knows, everybody knows.
What ever the reasons are, I guess jail is worth it to Manning. In fact, I wonder if it's not the whole idea, to get another few seconds in the limelight to complain about stuff again.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Not a she. Just saying.
Any time you see someone say "just saying" it's because they have nothing useful to say. Any time you find yourself say "just saying", just STFU.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Susan Carol McDougal (née Henley; born 1955) is one of the few people who served prison time as a result of the Whitewater controversy of the 15 individuals who were convicted of federal charges. Her refusal to answer "three questions" for a grand jury, on whether President Bill Clinton lied in his testimony during her Whitewater trial, led her to receive a jail sentence of 18 months for contempt of court. That made up most of the total 22 months she spent incarcerated. She received a full presidential pardon from Clinton in the final hours of his presidency in 2001.
There are at least 3 paths of reporting that are independent of chain-of-command.
Only in theory. They ultimately report to the same government run by the same corrupt elites responsible for the corruption in the first place.
What they actually are, are tools that those in power use to find those who might be or might potentially become whistle-blowers, and to provide a propaganda stage-prop to help fool the gullible into believing there are actually effective checks on their powers.
Just like the recent story about the NSA halting some of their spying. I guarantee you that whatever functionality and collection that was being done is continuing under a different program. Why would anyone believe anything the NSA says when they've been caught over and over blatantly lying to the public?
So far Snowden, Assange, and Manning all have a much better track record of being truthful and honest than anyone in the upper levels of the US federal government. Hell, in Assange's case, the US government is attempting to prosecute a citizen of a foreign nation living outside the US under US domestic laws who has never been on US soil and who has committed no crime even under US law (Pentagon Papers/NYT). If you don't think it's right for somebody like a Putin to kill or snatch & imprison someone in the West, how in the hell do you justify the US doing the same shit? Because "we're the 'Good Guys(TM)'? That's the sort of reasoning behind every atrocity and genocide in modern history.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Stop being so fucking insecure.
People are born different. One of my best childhood friends came out as being gay shortly after high school. Looking back, it's very obvious now. It wasn't a choice he made, it's just who he always was.
I'm not going to pretend to understand how anyone in those communities actually feel but I will respect them as individuals until given a reason not to. Their personal decisions have no impact on the lives of us, so why rant about it?
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
is that I think the Dems can be redeemed. There are folks like Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren, Alexandria Ocassio-Cortez & Ro Khanna who fight for the working class and the every day man/woman. There's an entire wing of the party (called "Justice Democrats") working to change the party from within. I know of no such movement in the Republican party. The closest the GOP has is Rand Paul's brand of libertarianism, but that ultimately leaves me at the mercy of folks with thousands of times more money than me.
Heck, AOC is actively working to reign the anti-worker, pro-corporate shills of the party in and primary the ones who refuse. Newt Gingrich basically did the opposite with his party in the 90s which, along with Bill Clinton, is why our country moved so far to the right and what got us in the mess we're in today.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
not even in the legal sense. Traitor has a very, very specific legal meaning. It means treason, and good luck proving that. It's got the highest bar for anything in our legal system (and for damn good reason).
In the metaphorical sense she's anything but a traitor. She did what she felt was right to expose horrible things being done in my name and yours. Things done to protect the interests of the ultra-wealthy and powerful at the expense of everyday working Americans.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Seig heil!
No sig today...
Uhh.... Manning had a connection with WikiLeaks. When he leaked classified Army data, who do you think he gave it to?
Also, he didn't "rat" on anything, he indiscriminately gave out classified information without even knowing what's in it.
From a legal standpoint Hitler was duly elected and became the dictator of Germany via legal means. He then instituted an immoral but totally legal program of attempted genocide of a whole people.
Moral and legal are often not only the same thing but contrary.
However, as everyone from Emerson to King understood, being morally right does not provide legal protect from the consequences of your actions. So when you act on your morality be ready to accept the consequences. The concept that you should not have to accept the consequences of your actions just because you are doing the right thing is a particularly modern notion and unrealistic in the extreme.
Here's a quote from Adrian Lamo on exposing Manning:
âoeHad I done nothing, I would always have been left wondering whether the hundreds of thousands of documents that had been leaked to unknown third parties would end up costing lives, either directly or indirectly.â
In case you're not familiar, Lamo was the person who Manning was passing these documents to in order to have them made available via WikiLeaks.
I don't care if you want to say bad things about the military or the US government; hell, I've done it plenty of times. But deliberately trying to get your battle buddies killed? What a miserable psychopathic piece of shit.
Be more specific. Name the time period and the specific people that the US attempted genocide on.
that this is how it starts. Go look up the early history of Stalin & Hitler. They didn't just start shooting. They were brutal, but clever. They made sure to appear legitimate until their hold on power was complete.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Not a She. His XY Chromosomes says he's a male. That is how science classifies him.
Better? Or are you "just saying" that "just saying" something doesn't make it so. He can call himself a girl all s/he wants I don't give a shit about whatever gender they think they are, but saying something ("just sayin") doesn't make it so, even according to your own logic. S/He could call themselves the Queen of England for all I care, it doesn't make it so.
You're not entitled to your own facts. Objective Reality Hurts
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Oh. I don't care.
Bingo.
And as for everyone here, it is important to understand the US Government has become the enemy of the people, and under no circumstances should you ever say anything to a government agent. Ever.
"I'm taking the fifth. I refuse to answer any questions. Under no circumstances can you infer guilt by my remaining silent and refusing to answer any and all questions, per my Constitutional Rights. Am I free to go or am I being detained?"
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Let us just go with the safe pronoun: s/h/it
This space unintentionally left blank.
They are birth defects. What have they got do do with Chelsea Manning?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Seriously who cares? If she wants to act the societal role of a girl, what's wrong with treating her like that? No need to bring it up in every story when it's not relevant.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I give you facts, you mod them troll, then you have less modpoints. I'll get more karma tomorrow. Mod away!
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You left out quite a lot of information by cherry picking those parts.
Those facts, you mean. If you have a problem with those facts, then by all means counter them. Otherwise, in short,
Fuck off and die.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
No, he was loyal to himself, and he never gave a fuck about either his country or anyone else.
The Cherokee, Hopi and Lakota domestically in the 18th and 19th century.
In the 20th one could argue that there was an effort underway to do so to black Americans as part of the eugenics movement before World War Two made it unfashionable.
Even still the forced sterilizations lasted until the 70s.
In terms of foreign entanglements, we don't have a specific policy of genocide but we certainly don't seem to mind Israel turning Gaza in to a Concentration Camp or colonizing the West Bank.
During Vietnam we basically waged chemical warfare and tried to defolate the Jungle and Rice paddies.
It is more fair to say the US occasionally aides in and sometimes commits a crime against humanity.
He didn't expose any such thing, as you well know. Idiots love to pretend that he exposed war crimes, but nobody has given a single example of anything in the released documents which would qualify. I'm sure some dickhead will link to the helicopter video as an example, but that incident has already been discussed to death and I have no desire to rehash it yet again.
Yes, it was offtopic.
But now that the question has been asked, perhaps you'll answer it?
At face value it might seem that way. I hate our imperialism and I hate the general dysfunction surrounding our military and down to earth folksy bush family crime syndicate.
Manning exposed nothing that I couldn't have told you was a normal consequence of war back when I was in highschool. Go read the documents (I'm sure you tell people you did)
Manning didn't expose american war crimes.
Manning exposed the ignorance of people like you.
Maybe it wasn't you, maybe you were against the war the entire time. But you're dumb, and not curious about the world around you. Still you enjoy flapping your gums if you'd been born into other circumstances you'd be a war happy chickenhawk republican. Probably deeply devoted to whatever passes for christianity in your neighborhood, complete with a nice little crib of bible-sounding quotes you like to drop so people think you read.
This is you. Weak mind, strong opinion. You happen to be "on the same side" as me but pretty much everyone with a clue is getting sick of you fuckers no matter how you dress yourselves up.
They ultimately report to the same government run by the same corrupt elites responsible for the corruption in the first place.
Which is why you report it to Congresspeople of the party that isn't in charge. Which, btw, can be done legally. And they will use their corrupt quest for power to expose it.
If you're as foolishly nihilistic as you are, and not actually in the military, then go the Ellsberg route.
If you're particularly dumb, you go the Snowden route and accept things from other countries for your leaks, thus planting yourself firmly on the wrong side of espionage laws. You also lie about what exactly you leaked, because few are going to look through the large volume of stuff and notice that the red meat you're talking about with your supporters isn't actually in the documents you leaked. 'Cause you leaked capabilities, and very few operational documents about how or where they're being used.
Those operational documents that were leaked showed they were not being used against US persons.
Your fans will assume they are so important that they must be the target of all of these capabilities, actual targeting documents be damned.
And then they post on Slashdot how the government is totally after them, despite their continued not-in-prison existence.
But I guess she really likes jail. I mean, you could both lie under oath and get away with it, or even tell the truth and know that it won't make shit difference on the opinion of the government (which in the US, has been proven to be the entity that controls justice) about Wikileaks. Even so, Chelsea prefers to go back to jail. Somebody needs to tell Chelsea that it's already too late to trust in heroic actions against that state.
Not a she. Just saying.
Yes, a "she". It is a courtesy, like when people call you "sir" even though you are not of noble birth.
If she wants to join the soccer team, or get a female-only scholarship, then you complain about her not being a real woman.
But if somebody wants to be addressed as a woman, its not that hard. For better or worse, it is a social norm.
Not a She. His XY Chromosomes says he's a male. That is how science classifies him.
Actually not quite. Classification is based on external appearance at birth, which is determined by the effect of androgens during pregnancy.
Even if a baby is known to be XY, phenotype trumps genotype.
Though somehow nowadays, we have people denying any biological basis to gender differences, and claiming things like occupation preference and aggression are purely cultural. So the logical conclusion is that you can be whatever sex you want. :-)
This makes perfect sense if you believe sex is a social construct
S/He could call themselves the Queen of England
NOT the same. Gender self-identification, unlike say racial or political identity, has a genuine, well-documented biological basis. Gender dysphoria in young children is a real thing, but usually resolves itself. In some cases it does not, and many people feel the best path is to live as the other sex.
Which is why you report it to Congresspeople of the party that isn't in charge.
Both major Parties have been the ones who oversaw the creation and expansion of these domestic spying programs. They're both equally part of the problem. They may use the issue to garner support and votes, but nothing will actually change. What we have currently is the political elite of both Parties versus the citizens.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Thanks, always nice to hear from the loonies.
Some interesting stuff from Excess mortality in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin
In his most recent edition of The Great Terror (2007), [British historian Robert] Conquest states that while exact numbers may never be known with complete certainty, at least 15 million people were killed "by the whole range of Soviet regime's terrors".[64] Rudolph Rummel in 2006 said that the earlier higher victim total estimates are correct, although he includes those killed by the government of the Soviet Union in other Eastern European countries as well.[65][66] Conversely, J. Arch Getty, Stephen G. Wheatcroft and others insist that the opening of the Soviet archives has vindicated the lower estimates put forth by "revisionist" scholars.[67][68] [British historian] Simon Sebag Montefiore in 2003 suggested that Stalin was ultimately responsible for the deaths of at least 20 million people.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
A fetus isn't a baby. Not even you racist dumbfucks believe that, as you don't have funerals for miscarriages at 13 weeks or earlier - when most abortions are performed.
Yeah exactly. To my mind, no one from the west has been held accountable for the iraq war. Certainly not the american executive at the time. People forget about wars and the guilty go unpunished. George w bush is still living it up playing golf and shit.
If people don't get punished, bad behaviour continues and the imperialists keep going with tacit approval.
-
If i want the societal role of a god
There's a well-respected societal role for a God, but you have to turn water into wine and give away fish and bread, and in the end I warn you it doesn't turn out well. Although you get resurrected.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
What other's - that hack Daniel Dumbshit-Berg? To digress for a moment, I've always been ambivalent on Joe Rogan's standup comedy, days on Fear Factor, fight commentary, and most of his podcast guests....but his interview of Bari Weiss of the New York Times was pure gold. She called Tulsi Gabbard an "Assad toady", but wasn't able to substantiate her accusation. Or define the word. Or even spell it.
Now, you can obviously spell the word "ego". And you might be able to define it. But the rest is reaching your fingers to the back of your mouth to regurgitate some character assassination you heard somewhere. Just like Bari Weiss. If Assange was 'in it for himself', he would have sold the cables given to Wikileaks by Manning to any number of state intelligence agencies around the planet, and be living on his own island in the Bahamas right now. With blackjack. And hookers.
Pressin those fingers down, hard, on the back of your tongue. Manning was bothered by war crimes and illegal wars, something Manning and Assange haters absolutely DGAF about. And she tried raising her concerns "through the appropriate channels" and was ignored. Which left leaking as her only choice, or stay silent and complicit in an illegal invasion and occupation.
As a member of the Army, you took an Oath of Enlistment to defend the Constitution of the United States, not neocon war criminals. Manning was upholding that oath, and is an infinitely better soldier and human being than you ever were or will be.
It was Obama who started the "Asian pivot" to start threatening China with the US Navy, not Trump. As Hillary Clinton is just as incompetent, petty and bloodthirsty as the Evil Mutant Death Walrus, I have no doubt she would have continued that policy.
I'm not one for whaboutism, but you may as well ask me about millions of other draft dodgers while you're bringing irrelevant people into the topic. Really, I don't care at all about them, neither do I care about Trump, over any issue at all. They, along with deserters, don't really mean anything to me. They didn't try to get their fellow soldiers killed. I would think more of Manning if he simply deserted instead.
Hell if I know, but you're a fucking moron if you think indiscriminately leaking classified documents to unknown third parties doesn't put military personnel at risk. That's not a talking point, it's just a fact, before and after 2010.
She is a Traitor to the country.
I my humble opinion, there is a difference between being a traitor to a country and being a traitor to a country's military chain of command. The word of law may disagree, but the word of a law may be incorrect, unjust, misguided, out-of-date or otherwise inappropriate, and a civilized and free nation should react appropriately to correct any such flaws if they are democratically determined to exist.
Yeah, lots of "if" statements, but boiling Manning's case down to "she's a traitor" because the law says so disregards an awful lot of nuance to the circumstance.
"Oh no... he found the
The Cherokee, Hopi and Lakota domestically in the 18th and 19th century.
I think if genocide was the end goal, the trail of tears wouldn't have been a thing, they would have just killed them instead.
In the 20th one could argue that there was an effort underway to do so to black Americans as part of the eugenics movement before World War Two made it unfashionable.
The eugenics movement (outside of Europe) wasn't about race so much as it was about making sure undesirable people, such as drug users, didn't procreate. Prominent black people were participants in it, namely they wanted to improve the image of the black race by sterilizing blacks who were "immoral".
In terms of foreign entanglements, we don't have a specific policy of genocide but we certainly don't seem to mind Israel turning Gaza in to a Concentration Camp or colonizing the West Bank.
I recall Israel pulling their own people out of the West Bank, including people who lived there before Israel became a thing again. And you might to look up the definition of a concentration camp.
During Vietnam we basically waged chemical warfare and tried to defolate the Jungle and Rice paddies.
I don't think you know much about the Vietnam war. The US didn't wage anything, that whole mess started with France (along with scores of other messes in other countries, up to and including slavery.) If you want to talk about crimes against humanity, go read about the origins of the Hanoi Hilton.
The way back machine has to know about a website before it can archive it. You should leave the thinking to those of us who can.
What's there to hold them accountable for, exactly?
Gender self-identification, unlike say racial or political identity, has a genuine, well-documented biological basis
Does it? What's the biological basis? Other than "brain misfiring"? Because if that's the biological basis you're talking about, then believing that you're Napoleon Bonaparte also has a well documented biological basis ...
It's kind of obvious that you're living in the deep end, so I'm not going to bother with most of your post. However, it seems you think I'm a neocon or at least know someone who is. Nothing can be further from the truth.
Unlike you, I don't let political affiliations define who I am or what I believe in. Terms like left and right only have any relevance in France, where they originated. Here in the US, these terms only lead to confusion and division. Speaking very honestly, I have Republicans call me a liberal, and Democrats call me a conservative, both very often. When either gets to know me a little, they call me moderate or libertarian. I am neither of these things; I have strong opinions on many issues, and I believe that capitalism doesn't work without regulation and laws (and I am very anti-socialism and anti-communism.)
But continue with your "us vs them" mentality if it makes you happy.
If some random jackoff insisted on being called sir, I'd tell him to get fucked too. Calling someone "sir" is not a societal norm; it's generally a sign of respect, or at least of deference. Calling a man "she" is likewise not a societal norm; it is a misguided attempt to be magnanimous. Rather like reassuring a young child that yes, there really is a Santa Claus.
Gender self-identification, unlike say racial or political identity, has a genuine, well-documented biological basis
Does it? What's the biological basis?
You can see it in early childhood development. Children strongly identify as boy or girl, even before they really know what the difference is. And not because adults tell them. It is hard-wired.
Evolution has driven us to identify by sex, and adopt gendered roles in society. The modern idea of gender equality - all roles in society filled by both sexes - is going against millions of years of evolution.
I am not saying there is a "biological basis" to sudden late-onset gender dysphoria. We have a lot to learn in that area.
It is easy to be an arse on the internet, but think about it.
In real life, if you meet a "man in a dress" - say a clerk in the post office - are you really going to abuse them and insist on calling them a man to the other staff?
I mean WTF dude, however deluded you may think they are, that just ain't cool. Let live a little?
The "two party system" is better described as "one party, two faces".
"Chelsea" does not exist.
So, you are denying the reality that legal name changes exist.
And yes I will be sent to -5 by the far leftists I don't even know why I read this site anymore.
Far leftists, i.e. enyone from moderately right of centre leftwards. If you want to get likes for your blatantly stupid bigotry, then head to Gab.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
The US didn't wage anything? Are you serious?
Not a She. His XY Chromosomes says he's a male. That is how science classifies him.
Well, science also classifies you as a moron. Since we both agree SCIENCE[*] is always right we therefore both accept my statement.
Anyway just to show you that your sub-schoolboy level of understanding of genetics is wrong, see if you can guess which of these people are XY:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
(none of them have had gender reassignment surgery). It's all of them!
Also you plonker, science doesn't bother itself with your silly pronouns. It's more concerned with more precise words like "phenotype".
[*] i.e. some rando claiming it's what "science says".
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Except not. Because if Stalin had actually killed 40 millions, then, together with the losses in WW2, the USSR population would have been halved.
That's assuming he rounded up 40 million people and killed them all at once, which is a really stupid assumption. Stalin was in power for 33 years; had he killed 1.2 million per year it would not have come close to halving the population as long as the birth rate was fairly high (which it was).
Anyway, no it wasn't 40 million; the accepted figure is somewhere between 15 and 20 million. Which is obviously so much better.
At least you aren't as ridiculous as some people who insist that Stalin has killed 100 millions of soviet citizens because adding the WW2 losses that would be about all of them.
You're the one being ridiculous; that 100 million is a figure attributed to communism as a whole, not Stalin specifically, and not the USSR alone.
The Jews were not even the largest group affected, that poor fate befalls the gypsies.
That's just complete horseshit. The most widely accepted estimate for Roma holocaust deaths is less than 220,000. Some historians have argued that the actual number is up to 1.5 million, but even if you credulously accept that estimate it is still nowhere near the number of Jews killed.
The largest single group would actually be "soviet civilians", though the number is close enough to the number of Jews killed that it's not really worth differentiating. The big difference, of course, is that Nazi Germany did not have a stated policy of exterminating soviet civilians; their deaths were mostly (though far from solely) a result of being used as slave labour for the German war machine. That doesn't make their deaths any less tragic, but it does put them in a different category than those like Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and the disabled, who were specifically targeted for extermination.
Wow there's a lot of people short of reasoning here. To summarise:
>>> Your a moran XY means Male
>> Existence of [insert one of many conditions] proves that is not always true
> Nuh uh doesn't count.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Does Manning have any of those conditions?
Utterly irrelevant.
The original claim is XY means male. The existence of those conditions proves beyond any doubt that XY is not the same as male, because there exist cases of XY where people are clearly, indisputably not male.
What you're trying to do is muddy to waters so the original claim of "XY is male" stands while hedging like hell.
Allowing people to live a lie that they are some other gender than what they were born is not good for their own mental health
Allowing people to not believe in Jesus will make them go to hell. We must convert them for their own good.
Thing is you're stating an opinion as if it were fact because you WANT to believe it's true, not because it is true. The evidence is very mixed. you claiming it as a known fact is you imposing your considerable biases.
What I want to know is why you care so much?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Those facts, you mean.
The fact is that you're an idiot who seems to think that IBM was part of the US government.
I hear of people trying to bring awareness for female genital mutilation, another thing that happens thousands of time every year.
You're comparing something forced on without consent to something entered into with full consent and at least over here considerable psychological evaluations and time spent in a reversible stage (hormone therapy). to compare the two is beyond disingenuous.
When this happens to men and we wrap this up in the euphemism of "gender reassignment surgery" then we celebrate it.
Kind of losing patience here.
Because it's not the same. You know like sex.
If you have sex with someone and you both consent, it's great. If you force sex on someone it's called "rape", it's bad and you shold go to prison for a long time. Even though they're both sticking your dick in someone.
My god! That's unpossible you say! How can some things which have physical similarities be so different!?
There is an attack on masculinity, and men are choosing to hand in their "man card" and get "reassigned".
OK lost patience.
Translation: Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh
That wasn't enough, now we celebrate the medical castration of men. We wrap it up in happy mouth noises and consider ourselves to be "helpful" in removing a man's ability to reproduce
Translation: waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Waiting to explode for 60 years so far, apparently. But it'll happen! Any day now!
Ah, I see, I misunderstood what you were saying ... though I'm still not sure I fully understand your argument.
Earlier you said that "Gender dysphoria in young children is a real thing, but usually resolves itself". This would seem to imply that "gender self-identification", as you put it, isn't a biological trait so much as a psychological/behavioral one (insofar as those are distinct concepts). The fact is, children role play and try on all kinds of behaviours. I've seen kids walk around on all fours, barking and panting. Are they self identifying as a dog?
A male child who takes on a female persona for a while isn't following some biological imperative to be a girl; it seems much more likely that he's just trying out a role. The only "hard wired" imperative is to try out new things; something which has served us well as a species. It only turns into gender dysphoria (a psychological problem) for those who eventually decide that they prefer a role which doesn't match their body.
He didn't; he gave away sensitive information which very well could have gotten plenty of good men and women killed
You say "plenty". Do you have any evidence that a single person did get killed?
Have you forgotten Abu Ghraib? That's the true face of the USA. The USA would be a very different place if not for people like Chelsea Manning who are willing to go to prison for their belief in justice.
No sig today...
It is easy to be an arse on the internet, but think about it.
In real life, if you meet a "man in a dress" - say a clerk in the post office - are you really going to abuse them and insist on calling them a man to the other staff?
I've met and had decent conversations with a couple of women who "identified" as men. They were fun to be around, and seemed to enjoy my company as well. I simply addressed them by name. Had they insisted that I refer to them as "he", I would have refused, but they never asked, so we never had any issues. They also never tried to force their way into a male bathroom or change room, so that's another issue which could have have caused conflict but was handily avoided.
On the other hand, I was once out drinking with a group of friends when one of them - while trying to get by a guy in a crowded bar - said "excuse me, dude". The guy immediately turned around and screamed at the top of his lungs "I AM A WOMAN!!!!!". The subsequent conversation did not go well for him, and he eventually left the bar in tears.
I don't give a shit how you identify. Just like I don't really give a shit if you believe that the earth is flat, or that Elvis is still alive. Your beliefs don't matter to me until you try to force them on me, or on others. You can go on believing that you are Sir Fluffynuts of Licksley all you like; I'm unlikely to comment on it until you start demanding that I address you by your title.
I would ask for it in writing, after which I would be quite happy to answer all of their questions. If they subsequently tried to charge me with anything I would laugh in their faces after the judge threw it out of court.
The comparison you're trying to draw is flawed because grand jury proceeding do not include the defendant. That's really the primary reason why there's no defense lawyer present; because the jury is not interested in hearing from the defendant at all. It's not a case of the defendant being forced to speak without his lawyer, but rather a case of the defendant not even being invited to the proceedings. Ergo your question is irrelevant; a more apt comparison would have been to ask "what would you say if the police didn't take you to the station?".
"Identifying" is the the same as believing. It is about powerful feelings that sometimes don't go away, even with therapy.
Not all trans go for that PC "man trapped in a woman's body".
Take Catherine McGregor for example. Very sporty, ex-army, not especially effeminate, but always had a problem with gender identity. Saw psychiatrists.
Very intelligent, articulate, and down to earth.
I've not heard her describe herself as a "woman", always a "trans-woman". She is under no delusions. Jokes about her Adams apple.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
This of course is very different to the hysterical sudden-late-onset gender dysphoria that seems to be plaguing alienated young adults on liberal arts campuses across America.
Have you forgotten Abu Ghraib? That's the true face of the USA.
You really are kind of an idiot, aren't you? I guess you think that Anders Breivik is the true face of Norway, too.
What's your explanation for Abu Ghraib? Are you one of those who believes it was just a couple of low ranking soldiers doing that and that none of the officers in charge knew anything?
No sig today...
While you're there you could comment on the US prison system.
I don't mean the sheer number of people in there, I mean the way that it's a place for institutionalized rape and that most Americans seem to be perfectly OK with that.
The two things (Abu Ghraib and federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison) seem related to me. The idea that there's whole classes/races of people who somehow "deserve" to be tortured, abused and shot at seems to be prevalent in the USA.
No sig today...
War crimes.
Give me a specific example of a war crime which occurred and for which "no one from the west has been held accountable".
Methed-up helicopter pilots who can't tell the difference between a fucking camera and a rocket launcher, killing journalists before confirming their targets are hostiles.
Give me an example of this occurring. No, the Bradley Manning video doesn't show that, no matter how much you would like to pretend that it does.
Abu-ghraib prisoner abuse and torture.
Plenty of people were held accountable for this, which directly contradicts the original claim.
Robert Bales. Kandahar massacre.
Got life in prison. Again, what kind of retard thinks this is an example of westerners not being held accountable?
The puppy pitcher. Don't look it up.
He was booted out of the marines, and his buddy was disciplined. Strike three, you're out!
Shall I continue?
If you're going to provide more of the same, then no, you certainly shouldn't. If you have some legit examples then please start.
The fact is that you're an idiot who seems to think that IBM was part of the US government.
The USA knew what IBM was doing. They also knew Alcoa was selling Aluminum, and they knew about the corporation selling the fuel (used to have a nice reference for him) etc. And it also knew that the holocaust was occurring, but delayed entry into the war so that everyone else would be at a disadvantage, having been bombed repeatedly. Japan wasn't getting bombed, though, so we did it. Then we were in the ideal position to domination manufacturing for quite some years, which is where the prosperity that the boomers enjoyed came from.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
No, just a military industrial complex that feeds soldiers into a meat grinder (Vietnam) for the sake of philosophical differences or selling more weapons (Iraq, Yemen). Not to mention thousands of Iraqi civilians.
That is how science classifies him.
And that is the attitude I'd expect from somebody whose most complex science education was high school-level chemistry and was later reinforced by ignorant bigots spouting memes.
Sex isn't even binary, it's a bimodal distribution. Your genes have a strong influence on that, but there are people with XX chromosomes who produce sperm and XY chromosomes who have ovaries. And on top of that, there are half a dozen other ways your chromosomes can be configured, and your hormone distribution can change things on top of that. Most people have XX or XY chromosomes and can be broadly classified as female or male because of that, but that's incredibly reductive -- everybody's sex is unique to them. Your desire to shove everything into a simple box is not actually scientific at all.
And given that actual, physical sex is that complicated, you think that gender, a mental construct, can be easily divided into two categories? That's as scientific as saying that the tides and lightning happen because God.
Here's a more detailed thread from an actual biologist on the subject, if you're willing to read: https://twitter.com/ScienceVet2/status/1035246030500061184
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
I had hoped we were living in a society that could recognize the difference and be BETTER about how we treat those that buck the system for a greater cause. Silly me.
And why the general public wouldn't care about what criminals do to each other?
No, I want you to explain why the general public thinks they're all "hardened criminals" (they aren't) and (b), why even "hardened criminals" deserve that.
(Conversely, why should the other hardened criminals be allowed to have "fun" doing it? The very worst of society seems to have great fun in prison)
For you to single out the USA says far more about your biases than it does about the actual character of the United States as a nation.
I single it out because a) America makes more noise about being decent and upstanding, and b) Because people in other countries see it as a genuine problem and try to do something whereas it's on the rise in the USA.
No sig today...
This panicked claim again. What is your problem? Male/Female is not nearly as definite as you insecure idiots claim.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
There is an attack on masculinity, and men are choosing to hand in their "man card" and get "reassigned". For every woman that decides to get "reassigned" there are 9 men that do the same, so this is largely a matter of men allowing themselves to be castrated.
Ah, _that_ is your defect. And, not surprisingly, you have no understanding of what the facts actually imply. The simple reason female to male is much rarer is that it does not really work well surgically. This has absolutely nothing to do with "an attack on masculinity". If that one is real, it is happening somewhere else.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
The USA knew what IBM was doing. They also knew Alcoa was selling Aluminum, and they knew about the corporation selling the fuel (used to have a nice reference for him) etc.
Who exactly in the US knew this, when, and why does it matter? Everyone did business with Nazi Germany. Throughout the 1930s even Palestinian Jews were importing goods from Germany. England and France continued doing business with them right up until the outbreak of war. Spain and Italy, of course, continued doing so long after, along with many other European nations. Of what significance is it, exactly, that some American businesses acted the same as businesses in most other nations?
And it also knew that the holocaust was occurring, but delayed entry into the war so that everyone else would be at a disadvantage, having been bombed repeatedly.
Historical revisionism at it's finest. No historian of any note believes anything remotely like this. The US entry into the war was delayed by domestic political bickering. However, even before their official entry into the war, the US was providing massive shipments to Europe in support of her allies, as well as engaging in naval battles against German vessels. You're making up complete nonsense.
Of course you won't criticize the USSR for signing a neutrality pact with the Nazis, since commies are your kind of people. Nor would you criticize the Swedes for remaining neutral throughout the war, because that's just not a popular position. But you're more than happy to make up nonsense about the USA because you're a Brave Peoples Warrior attacking those eeeeevil capitalists, and truth doesn't matter when you have righteousness on your side.
No, I want you to explain why the general public thinks they're all "hardened criminals" (they aren't)
Because people are ignorant and like easy stereotypes.
and (b), why even "hardened criminals" deserve that.
When did I say they did?
(Conversely, why should the other hardened criminals be allowed to have "fun" doing it? The very worst of society seems to have great fun in prison)
If you think anyone has fun in prison you're slowly starting to transition from "kind of an idiot" to "definitely an idiot". Regardless, you're asking the wrong person since I never made any such claims.
I single it out because a) America makes more noise about being decent and upstanding,
This is nonsense. People in pretty much every EU nation make far more noise about how superior they are to those horrible colonials than people in the US have ever made about themselves. For every one american I hear chanting "USA number 1!" I hear at least 5 Europeans telling me how Europe is better at absolutely everything. And Canadians aren't any better, either. Our national sport may be hockey, but pointing out why we are better than Americans comes in as a close second.
and b) Because people in other countries see it as a genuine problem and try to do something whereas it's on the rise in the USA.
Again, nonsense. In the US the number of reports is rising, but that's not the same as the number of occurrences rising. Anonymous surveys of prisons have always shown a much higher incidence than actual reported incidents, which is no surprise; the same occurs amongst the civilian population. The rise in reporting coincided with the introduction of new reporting standards. The new reporting standards themselves were driven by the passage of the "Prison Rape Elimination Act" way back in 2003.
Of course you can ignore all that and keep insisting that "rape is increasing in US prisons" and "only other countries try to do soemthing about it", but that will just help move you further into the "definitely an idiot" category.
Of course you won't criticize the USSR for signing a neutrality pact with the Nazis, since commies are your kind of people. Nor would you criticize the Swedes for remaining neutral throughout the war, because that's just not a popular position.
I'd have criticized those things if the USSR or Sweden were the subject, but they aren't. That's why that shit is whataboutism. Maybe not skipping your meds would help you stay on topic?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Maybe not skipping your meds would help you stay on topic?
Says the cunt whining about US companies as a response to someone saying that the US is nothing like Nazi Germany.
Says the cunt whining about US companies as a response to someone saying that the US is nothing like Nazi Germany.
Sounds like you don't know that corporations were much of the problem in Nazi Germany. Your ignorance knows no bounds, including national boundaries.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This is an interesting one. Some public good did come out of the material she published. Namely in ending that horrifying drone program also known as terrorist making factory. It was because of automated drone strikes killing civilians that we caught a terrorist here in the U.S. who told the authorities their entire family were killed by a flying robot for no reason. They trained their entire life to find the person responsible for their deaths which is actually understandable on a personal level. Who wouldn't do the same thing? Tragic yes, but she served her sentence did she not? She's okay by my book. Thank you stranger. Odd that she isn't testifying though, I wonder why?
a man can never be a woman. a woman can never be a man.
Amongst all the stupid things you've said over the years, blaming German companies for the holocaust has got to be by far the stupidest. Fuck off.
If your defense of the USA is that "other countries do it too" then you're losing sight of the problem.
No sig today...
The US tried to clean up the French mess. The USSR took it as an opportunity to fuck up the country even more, just to fuck with America.
I'm glad we could all get this lesson on what the military is from a guy who never served.
Wow, you didn't just move those goalposts, you launched them to another planet!
That's stupid, of course. If you're going to blame the USA for all the retards killing each other, then you may as well blame Saddam for the US invasion, and the subsequent retards killing each other. But you won't do that because - under your ideology - the USA has to be responsible for every bad thing that happens I'm the world.
You want me to explain to you why a facility full of hardened criminals might have a somewhat high incidence of rape? And why the general public wouldn't care about what criminals do to each other?
Yes, because the US has a far greater issue with this than other countries despite imprisoning a far higher percentage of its population.
It's not coincidence that the term 'rape culture' was invented to describe the US prison system before being coopted by the man hating fuckwits trying to scare women into supporting the destruction of masculinity - and see the outcomes for boys in schools these days for the damage that's causing.
Of course, that merely feeds the prison system but hey, the general public don't care. Why?
"Classified" is just a statute construction only in effect since 1917. While it's the single best tool the power brokers have to subjugate the masses, it has no moral authority. You certainly won't find it as a power listed in the Constitution (because the founders knew the dangers of a secret government).
Manning may be a violator of statute but she's a patriot to the Constitution.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
There are lots and lots of ways for a contractor to report illegal activities. And it is a requirement that contractors be briefed on those ways every year.
But they don't get protection under whistleblower laws; they aren't considered federal employees. (The argument could be made that federal employees aren't protected by whistleblower laws...)
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
I guarantee you that whatever functionality and collection that was being done is continuing under a different program.
Then you know of a specific instance where the illegal mass collection of US citizen data has thwarted a terrorist attack or dismantled a serious criminal conspiracy against the US or its citizens? The NSA isn't shutting down the program because of pangs of conscience; they want to use the money elsewhere, but they can't do so while its allocated to collectng more data than it can process. The whole issue is an albatross over their necks, and the senior management employees in the intelligence umbrella during the Obama administration have all moved on; there's no more management ass to cover.
Why would anyone believe anything the NSA says when they've been caught over and over blatantly lying to the public?
Well, that's true... But any assertion from the NSA is not conclusive proof that the NSA is factually untruthful.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Both major Parties have been the ones who oversaw the creation and expansion of these domestic spying programs.
Prove it.
Not the "both parties are the same!!!" thing. The domestic spying program part.
Because the actual documents Snowden leaked have all of 1 program that can collect on US persons, and that one was legal thanks to an over-broad 1979 SCOTUS decision (phone records were ruled standard business records and thus not private. Phone records grew in the age of cell phones to reveal....well really the same stuff they revealed back in 1979, since you knew the location of the call since it was a land line).
The very, very, very few documents that talk about targetting explicitly include steps to exclude US persons. The vast majority of Snowden's leaked docs were capabilities, with no description on how they are used.
Instead, it has been continuously asserted that the NSA must be doing massive amounts of domestic spying, on the assumption that that is the only possible use for those capabilities. Which is an incredibly dumb assumption, but it's also incredibly popular.
If you want to freak out about domestic surveillance, look at the FBI, your local police, and technologies like Stingrays.
Tell me again about how they should have talked to the Republicans about the Republican implanted spying programs.
Have you been in a coma? Just because Republicans do something does not mean they will not attack Democrats for doing the same. See: Every scandal since at least the 1990s.
Quitting does not satisfy the moral imperative. People are being harmed, and taking no action to stop it when you could have is not a moral course of action.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
What a load of bollocks. You were there for 19 years. Your government faked an attack on one of their ships to justify an invasion. Stop blaming other people.
Be honest. How many funerals has your church held for miscarriages under 13 weeks? How many families even named them? It's also easy to show how full of shit anti-abortionists are by a simple application of the Trolly Problem.
I see you're a projectionist.
He'd be talking to models about it (without getting too specific). While they were giving him blow jobs. You know, if he was just in it for himself.
Shit for brains.
From a legal standpoint Hitler was duly elected and became the dictator of Germany via legal means. He then instituted an immoral but totally legal program of attempted genocide of a whole people.
That is a bit of a misnomer.
Hitler wasn't legitimately elected, he just wanted it to look that way. The Nazis had their SA stormtroopers (A.K.A. Brown Shirts) literally stand over voters in booths to ensure they voted correctly. Hitler and the Nazi's rise to power was a massive usurpation of democracy, not a failing of it.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
I think male means having a XY Chromosome. It is objective. Having XX means Female. And in the rare cases of XYY, XXX, XXY, and a few others, we have to have some measure of extended viewpoint. Most, if not all Trans people are not Chromosome defected in any way.
He is for XY, She is for XX.
Your Royal Highness is reserved for Queens/Kings not just anyone claiming to be a sovereign..
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Lolwut!?
Both Parties have been in power, back and forth, for the entire time these agencies were created, expanded endlessly, and then allowed to create and operate the spy programs for years and years until people like Snowden exposed them.
And guess what? They're *still* doing the same unconstitutional shit as we speak.
Neither Party has stopped them. Both Parties are responsible for their creation and enabling them to create these programs and give them budgets every year to carry on doing so.
The only one in Congress that's fought it has been Rand Paul.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Reading. Try it!
Again, you completely glossed over the problem with your claim about illegal domestic spying via Snowden docs: There isn't any in the docs he leaked.
So where's the proof? Is your ego so large you find it unfathomable that the NSA would spend its time spying on foreigners?
its not because of what he did then its because of what hes doing now
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same