The US Chamber of Commerce is a lobbying organization -- it's not like they have Industrial Super Secrets. Besides, a high proportion of their clients are Chinese anyway and presumably have pretty good access to the organization already.
True. And contrary to this news items title, this law will make true social networks thrive - just not corporate controlled ones. I already meet the letter of the law with Disapora, and am perfectly happy thank you.
And yet the population at large will continue to blissfully re-elect that same old clowns that are helping to slowly tighten the noose/boil us frogs... nothing to see here.
"They don’t really know how to keep U.S. military networks secure." Translation: "Hand up if you want to go on our security risk Suspects List". Could you help us out?
Now that's just stupid. You don't believe the truck bombing in Time Square and along the MLK day parade route out West was enough?
"Was enough" for what - unrestrained power? No, sorry your fearmongering has lost it's effect - it is not enough. Plus you must mean the FBI's own terrorist plots (that they repeatedly and miraculously thwart successfully). To clarify - (because I admit it does defy belief for normal rational thinking people):
"The FBI has received substantial criticism over the past decade — much of it valid — but nobody can deny its record of excellence in thwarting its own Terrorist plots. Time and again, the FBI concocts a Terrorist attack, infiltrates Muslim communities in order to find recruits, persuades them to perpetrate the attack, supplies them with the money, weapons and know-how they need to carry it out — only to heroically jump in at the last moment, arrest the would-be perpetrators whom the FBI converted, and save a grateful nation from the plot manufactured by the FBI. "
"direction we're heading" Already there, no!? All that is needed is a slightly more trigger happy president sitting on the now live "Kill anyone without due process button" (see linked article re:Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann)
Related: Forget Rogue, Microsoft handed ability to intercept SSL on windows (Another Wikileaks revelation, translated) to Tunisian dictator Ben Ali, apparently in return for contracts, stifling open source competition etc etc in Tunisia and allowing them to intercept Facebook, Google,... before the Arab spring revolution took place.
Apparently, faced with hundreds of thousands of documents vividly highlighting stomach-turning war crimes and abuses -- death squads and widespread torture and civilian slaughter all as part of a war he admired for years and which his newspaper did more than any other single media outlet to enable -- John Burns and his NYT editors decided that the most pressing question from this leak is this: what's Julian Assange really like?
It is when the US Gov forces Genetically Modified food down everyone's throat, often in the face of overwhelming democratic opposition to them - even in some cases the political elite objecting (See this India cable: "Very serious fears [...] of Monsanto controlling our food chain"), that things start to get really questionable.
This is the point I emphasize whenever I talk about why topics such as the sprawling Surveillance State and the attempted criminalization of WikiLeaks and whistleblowing are so vital. The free flow of information and communications enabled by new technologies -- as protest movements in the Middle East and a wave of serious leaks over the last year have demonstrated -- is a uniquely potent weapon in challenging entrenched government power and other powerful factions. And that is precisely why those in power -- those devoted to preservation of the prevailing social order -- are so increasingly fixated on seizing control of it and snuffing out its potential for subverting that order: they are well aware of, and are petrified by, its power, and want to ensure that the ability to dictate how it is used, and toward what ends, remains exclusively in their hands.
I pulled the wrong quote from that link. I meant to use this one: (Emphasis mine)
This is the point I emphasize whenever I talk about why topics such as the sprawling Surveillance State and the attempted criminalization of WikiLeaks and whistleblowing are so vital. The free flow of information and communications enabled by new technologies -- as protest movements in the Middle East and a wave of serious leaks over the last year have demonstrated -- is a uniquely potent weapon in challenging entrenched government power and other powerful factions. And that is precisely why those in power -- those devoted to preservation of the prevailing social order -- are so increasingly fixated on seizing control of it and snuffing out its potential for subverting that order: they are well aware of, and are petrified by, its power, and want to ensure that the ability to dictate how it is used, and toward what ends, remains exclusively in their hands.
I agree with GP - The Aussie Greens appear to be the only political party with a backbone on these issues. Where are the minority Aussie "right" parties which should also be objecting to this expansion of state power? The US has a few, even if they are completely ignored by the mainstream media circus...
Quote from that last link "A prime aim of the growing Surveillance State":
The emergence of entities like WikiLeaks (which single-handedly jeopardizes pervasive government and corporate secrecy) and Anonymous (which has repeatedly targeted entities that seek to impede the free flow of communication and information) underscores the way in which this conflict is a genuine "war." The U.S. Government's efforts to destroy WikiLeaks and harass its supporters have been well-documented. Meanwhile, the U.S. seeks to expand its own power to launch devastating cyber attacks: there is ample evidence suggesting its involvement in the Stuxnet attacks on Iran, as well as reason to believe that some government agency was responsible for the sophisticated cyber-attack that knocked WikiLeaks off U.S. servers (attacks the U.S. Government tellingly never condemned, let alone investigated). Yet simultaneously, the DOJ and other Western law enforcement agencies have pursued Anonymous with extreme vigor. That is the definition of a war over Internet control: the government wants the unilateral power to cyber-attack and shut down those who pose a threat ot it, while destroying those who resists those efforts.
The only thing "radical" about Noam Chomsky is that he speaks the truth to power, backed up with plenty of verifiable real world references (which make the often repeated 'He is no more than a conspiracy theorist' little more than a sound bite for the seriously-uninformed to repeat). When presidential candidates dare do the same, they are disappeared off the media circus.
Re:Could Someone Help Me Out With This?
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 2
Either you have to raise taxes or cut spending.
...OR you "print" more money and hand it to the MIC so they can spend it at todays value, before the rest of the population cottons on that it must be devalued. Don't worry, all that printed cash eventually "filters downs" to weaker hands, forming bubbles here and there like in the housing market. Take a course that explains it with references: one of many (worth starting at chapter 1 but if your in a hurry)....
You can't negotiate with that sort of hatred.... If Obama get's re-elected, maybe the Republicans can finally set aside their hate and work with the guy.
As this video repeatedly references - the "extreme" Republican right have been publicly heaping praise on Obama's policies for some time now. Hardly "hate", and hardly a sign that they do not wish to work with Obama. You Sir are so far off the mark it is not funny - or a political shill - which is it?Follow the references given everything is on the public record. Convince yourself on un-debatable fact that hardline Republicans have indeed been praising Obama's continuation (and escalation!) of Bush/Cheney's assault on civil liberties... and get back to us (unless your a shill, of course).
And it's not your place to decide who a company can and can't do business with, based on your own moral and political views.
Bzzt, very very wrong. Yes it is societies place to decide how a company can and cannot behave, including with whom they can and can't do business with... since the company is after all operating as a guest within the framework society has setup (not the other way around, as appears to be the thinking in the US).
Visa/Mastercard have 98% market share in the EU - If they decide to stop payment processing for any political parties they don't like, or boycott any business competitor's of their "preferred partners", or as in this case try to stifle whistleblowers - it is societies legal (and moral) obligation to punish financially that companies bad behavior, at worst drive it right out of the market for not playing fair and by the rules. Unfortunately we here in the US we appear to let companies run society (by owning our politicians) however they prefer, which lead's to fanatical pro-corporate-runs the state ideas like this being often repeated: "it's not [societies] place to decide who a company can and can't do business with".
What you say is true (they would have to exit euro zone) - however the immediate benefits that would bring to Greece + the disadvantage of having a difficult time attracting foreign investment for some undetermined period be worse than auctioning off all public assets and assuming the corporate financial sectors insurmountable debt (i.e. a debt unrepayable by Greece, ever)? The linked article (and see my other post in this thread from Nobel prize winner's take) appear to be making a pretty convincing case based on hard evidence that it is the lesser of two evils for Greece (and Ireland, Portugal) to take. I have yet to see credible counter arguments, but not for lack of searching. By credible I mean not Financial sector shills repeating half truths and the "Intellectual Dishonesty" being outlines in the link... of which there are more than plenty. Which may not be surprising considering that the US Financial industry could lose 100 billion or so if Greece defaults, apparently (see first post after analysis here).
Slashdot Mirror
The US Chamber of Commerce is a lobbying organization -- it's not like they have Industrial Super Secrets. Besides, a high proportion of their clients are Chinese anyway and presumably have pretty good access to the organization already.
True, The Chamber Of commerce also hacks anyone who criticizes their illegal and immoral behaviour. HBGary Federal payback perhaps?
True. And contrary to this news items title, this law will make true social networks thrive - just not corporate controlled ones. I already meet the letter of the law with Disapora, and am perfectly happy thank you.
And yet the population at large will continue to blissfully re-elect that same old clowns that are helping to slowly tighten the noose/boil us frogs... nothing to see here.
"They don’t really know how to keep U.S. military networks secure." Translation: "Hand up if you want to go on our security risk Suspects List". Could you help us out?
...build the world's biggest couch so it can fall between the cushions.
...because that is where the extremely profitable Australian mining companies (lack of) tax obligations to the land they are raping, seem to have gone...
Actually, Aussie taxpayers are even giving handouts to profitable mining companies...
Ho hum... whatever.
Now that's just stupid. You don't believe the truck bombing in Time Square and along the MLK day parade route out West was enough?
"Was enough" for what - unrestrained power? No, sorry your fearmongering has lost it's effect - it is not enough. Plus you must mean the FBI's own terrorist plots (that they repeatedly and miraculously thwart successfully). To clarify - (because I admit it does defy belief for normal rational thinking people):
"The FBI has received substantial criticism over the past decade — much of it valid — but nobody can deny its record of excellence in thwarting its own Terrorist plots. Time and again, the FBI concocts a Terrorist attack, infiltrates Muslim communities in order to find recruits, persuades them to perpetrate the attack, supplies them with the money, weapons and know-how they need to carry it out — only to heroically jump in at the last moment, arrest the would-be perpetrators whom the FBI converted, and save a grateful nation from the plot manufactured by the FBI. "
Stupid is as stupid does.
P.S. We can pretty much chalk the budget approval for this project up to one movement: occupywallst.org
Like how our society has turned into a culture of unrestrained power? Yeah, me either.
"direction we're heading" Already there, no!? All that is needed is a slightly more trigger happy president sitting on the now live "Kill anyone without due process button" (see linked article re:Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann)
Or that outside contracting companies are a nice source of kickbacks that could not be "handled" otherwise.
Related: Forget Rogue, Microsoft handed ability to intercept SSL on windows (Another Wikileaks revelation, translated) to Tunisian dictator Ben Ali, apparently in return for contracts, stifling open source competition etc etc in Tunisia and allowing them to intercept Facebook, Google,... before the Arab spring revolution took place.
Considering the news from just the last week:
I am not surprised at all that powerful organizations continue to attack them, cheered on by the usual propaganda fan club.
Ah yes, the NYTimes - The Nixonian henchmen of today
Apparently, faced with hundreds of thousands of documents vividly highlighting stomach-turning war crimes and abuses -- death squads and widespread torture and civilian slaughter all as part of a war he admired for years and which his newspaper did more than any other single media outlet to enable -- John Burns and his NYT editors decided that the most pressing question from this leak is this: what's Julian Assange really like?
It is when the US Gov forces Genetically Modified food down everyone's throat, often in the face of overwhelming democratic opposition to them - even in some cases the political elite objecting (See this India cable: "Very serious fears [...] of Monsanto controlling our food chain"), that things start to get really questionable.
This is the point I emphasize whenever I talk about why topics such as the sprawling Surveillance State and the attempted criminalization of WikiLeaks and whistleblowing are so vital. The free flow of information and communications enabled by new technologies -- as protest movements in the Middle East and a wave of serious leaks over the last year have demonstrated -- is a uniquely potent weapon in challenging entrenched government power and other powerful factions. And that is precisely why those in power -- those devoted to preservation of the prevailing social order -- are so increasingly fixated on seizing control of it and snuffing out its potential for subverting that order: they are well aware of, and are petrified by, its power, and want to ensure that the ability to dictate how it is used, and toward what ends, remains exclusively in their hands.
I pulled the wrong quote from that link. I meant to use this one: (Emphasis mine)
This is the point I emphasize whenever I talk about why topics such as the sprawling Surveillance State and the attempted criminalization of WikiLeaks and whistleblowing are so vital. The free flow of information and communications enabled by new technologies -- as protest movements in the Middle East and a wave of serious leaks over the last year have demonstrated -- is a uniquely potent weapon in challenging entrenched government power and other powerful factions. And that is precisely why those in power -- those devoted to preservation of the prevailing social order -- are so increasingly fixated on seizing control of it and snuffing out its potential for subverting that order: they are well aware of, and are petrified by, its power, and want to ensure that the ability to dictate how it is used, and toward what ends, remains exclusively in their hands.
I agree with GP - The Aussie Greens appear to be the only political party with a backbone on these issues. Where are the minority Aussie "right" parties which should also be objecting to this expansion of state power? The US has a few, even if they are completely ignored by the mainstream media circus...
Australia also recently greatly expanded its Surveillance State. In combination with this new "cyberCrime" bill the game is set - This is the states power grab to control information on the internet.
Quote from that last link "A prime aim of the growing Surveillance State":
The emergence of entities like WikiLeaks (which single-handedly jeopardizes pervasive government and corporate secrecy) and Anonymous (which has repeatedly targeted entities that seek to impede the free flow of communication and information) underscores the way in which this conflict is a genuine "war." The U.S. Government's efforts to destroy WikiLeaks and harass its supporters have been well-documented. Meanwhile, the U.S. seeks to expand its own power to launch devastating cyber attacks: there is ample evidence suggesting its involvement in the Stuxnet attacks on Iran, as well as reason to believe that some government agency was responsible for the sophisticated cyber-attack that knocked WikiLeaks off U.S. servers (attacks the U.S. Government tellingly never condemned, let alone investigated). Yet simultaneously, the DOJ and other Western law enforcement agencies have pursued Anonymous with extreme vigor. That is the definition of a war over Internet control: the government wants the unilateral power to cyber-attack and shut down those who pose a threat ot it, while destroying those who resists those efforts.
The only thing "radical" about Noam Chomsky is that he speaks the truth to power, backed up with plenty of verifiable real world references (which make the often repeated 'He is no more than a conspiracy theorist' little more than a sound bite for the seriously-uninformed to repeat). When presidential candidates dare do the same, they are disappeared off the media circus.
Either you have to raise taxes or cut spending.
...OR you "print" more money and hand it to the MIC so they can spend it at todays value, before the rest of the population cottons on that it must be devalued. Don't worry, all that printed cash eventually "filters downs" to weaker hands, forming bubbles here and there like in the housing market. Take a course that explains it with references: one of many (worth starting at chapter 1 but if your in a hurry)....
Mod parent up!
You can't negotiate with that sort of hatred.... If Obama get's re-elected, maybe the Republicans can finally set aside their hate and work with the guy.
As this video repeatedly references - the "extreme" Republican right have been publicly heaping praise on Obama's policies for some time now. Hardly "hate", and hardly a sign that they do not wish to work with Obama. You Sir are so far off the mark it is not funny - or a political shill - which is it? Follow the references given everything is on the public record. Convince yourself on un-debatable fact that hardline Republicans have indeed been praising Obama's continuation (and escalation!) of Bush/Cheney's assault on civil liberties ... and get back to us (unless your a shill, of course).
And it's not your place to decide who a company can and can't do business with, based on your own moral and political views.
Bzzt, very very wrong. Yes it is societies place to decide how a company can and cannot behave, including with whom they can and can't do business with... since the company is after all operating as a guest within the framework society has setup (not the other way around, as appears to be the thinking in the US).
Visa/Mastercard have 98% market share in the EU - If they decide to stop payment processing for any political parties they don't like, or boycott any business competitor's of their "preferred partners", or as in this case try to stifle whistleblowers - it is societies legal (and moral) obligation to punish financially that companies bad behavior, at worst drive it right out of the market for not playing fair and by the rules. Unfortunately we here in the US we appear to let companies run society (by owning our politicians) however they prefer, which lead's to fanatical pro-corporate-runs the state ideas like this being often repeated: "it's not [societies] place to decide who a company can and can't do business with".
Even experienced and well know economists are now questioning the motivations and legality of "Experienced" economists running our current markets.
What you say is true (they would have to exit euro zone) - however the immediate benefits that would bring to Greece + the disadvantage of having a difficult time attracting foreign investment for some undetermined period be worse than auctioning off all public assets and assuming the corporate financial sectors insurmountable debt (i.e. a debt unrepayable by Greece, ever)? The linked article (and see my other post in this thread from Nobel prize winner's take) appear to be making a pretty convincing case based on hard evidence that it is the lesser of two evils for Greece (and Ireland, Portugal) to take. I have yet to see credible counter arguments, but not for lack of searching. By credible I mean not Financial sector shills repeating half truths and the "Intellectual Dishonesty" being outlines in the link... of which there are more than plenty. Which may not be surprising considering that the US Financial industry could lose 100 billion or so if Greece defaults, apparently (see first post after analysis here).