Your definition of "not troubling" is pretty fucking evil:
That cable was released by WikiLeaks in May, 2011, and, as McClatchy put it at the time, "provides evidence that U.S. troops executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians, including a woman in her 70s and a 5-month-old infant, then called in an airstrike to destroy the evidence, during a controversial 2006 incident in the central Iraqi town of Ishaqi." The U.S. then lied and claimed the civilians were killed by the airstrike.
That cable was released by WikiLeaks in May, 2011, and, as McClatchy put it at the time, "provides evidence that U.S. troops executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians, including a woman in her 70s and a 5-month-old infant, then called in an airstrike to destroy the evidence, during a controversial 2006 incident in the central Iraqi town of Ishaqi." The U.S. then lied and claimed the civilians were killed by the airstrike.
Yep. I should have mentioned that. The fact that he lobbied Iraq to stay, really pours a big bucket of irony on the "change you can believe in" slogan.
There is so much BS in your post I need a front end loader to get through it. Citations on my website.
1) While the war crime happened in 2006, Assange's cache of cables was only decrypted this summer. So while the news is old so to speak, it is fresh to the public.
2) Obama is a warmonger. For example,
(a) Bush launced 52 drone attacks. Obama has, in a much shorter period, launched 254. You think the GOP twisted his arm to do that?
(b) When Bush left office, there were about 30k troops in Afghanistan. Obama bumped that up to 112k at one point. That was Obama's choice?
(c) Obama is working hard to undermine the Convention on Cluster Munitions even though we aren't even a signatory? You gonna blame that on the GOP?
(d) And then there is Libya. Our founding fathers were well aware of the dangers posed by leaders who could both decide to go to war and then decide how to fight it. They all came from Europe which had suffered greatly under its kings. So they separate the war powers -- Congress got the right to declare it, the President the right to decide how to fight it. Since Korea, this has been ignored and then institutionalized in the War Powers Act. The crime in Libya is that Obama didn't even live up to his duties of the War Powers Act setting a precident that the President can unilaterally declare war. That is fucking huge. And no, his arm wasn't twisted by the GOP, but when future President Cheney arbitrarily attacks Iceland, remember to thank Obama.
3) Recognizing Obama as a neocon warmonger has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with his behavior. Bush was, until Obama embraced and extended his policies, the worst piece of shit this country had had for a president. The fact that Obama is African American however, cannot excuse him for being worse than Bush. Racism is supporting Obama DESPITE everything he has done just because he's not white.
A peace prize is in order if indeed Manning is the leaker. Without the released cables, Obama would have been able to convince Iraq that our troops should have stayed longer. Because of the leaks, Obama failed in his warmongering:
That cable was released by WikiLeaks in May, 2011, and, as McClatchy put it at the time, âoeprovides evidence that U.S. troops executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians, including a woman in her 70s and a 5-month-old infant, then called in an airstrike to destroy the evidence, during a controversial 2006 incident in the central Iraqi town of Ishaqi.â The U.S. then lied and claimed the civilians were killed by the airstrike. Although this incident had been previously documented by the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the high-profile release of the cable by WikiLeaks generated substantial attention (and disgust) in Iraq, which made it politically unpalatable for the Iraqi government to grant the legal immunity the Obama adminstration was seeking. Indeed, it was widely reported at the time the cable was released that it made it much more difficult for Iraq to allow U.S. troops to remain beyond the deadline under any conditions.
In other words, whoever leaked that cable cast light on a heinous American war crime and, by doing so, likely played some significant role in thwarting an agreement between the Obama and Maliki governments to keep U.S. troops in Iraq and thus helped end this stage of the Iraq war
Your opinion is valid. It's also subjective and irrelevant. And GP's post was rightly modded down for the same reason.
Opinions don't deserve to be modded down just because they are opinions. If that is the standard, your opinion on opinions deserves to be modded down.
As for wifi in RV parks -- I'm not an RVer, nor do I desire to become one. However, people who go to RV parks aren't likely trying to connect with nature. They are more likely trying to "get away" much like people who use hotels do, except they have to do their own dishes and make their own beds. Some people are into that and some people are into sleeping in a tent, though some might whine about the latter group too -- seriously, people using sleeping bags? Shouldn't they be weaving temporary blankets out of bark strips?
Hey, at least that's ~1.25 fewer drones at $8m apiece flying around blowing up innocent people. I'm all for the US simply wasting money rather than wasting innocents and creating the conditions for more terrorism.
Don't be an idiot. There is real and material difference between your credit card data and friends, and committing war crimes. Some things have no public value (your CC number for example) and some are huge.
Because the neocons (Obama included) are pissed. They were worried the cables would reveal war crimes, which they did, and get us booted from Iraq, which they did. They want to go on using up our money to kill people for their own profit, and Assange, wikileaks, and everyone in that chain are throwing a monkey wrench in their plans.
Plainly, it SILENCE that would cause death and destruction. In such circumstances, it is immoral, inhumane, and evil to keep the information secret. If anything should be a capital crime, it should be the failure to reveal information where such failure results in 1000s of deaths.
But that's a story about our proud government killing 21 children in Yemen and how the information was contained in the cables. So instead of some theoretical bullshit about how the leak endangering soldiers, the truth is it will save 500 soldiers per year and we won't be responsible for 11,000 (min) civilian deaths per year in Iraq. Every person involved in leaking the cables deserves a Nobel Peace prize.
This is akin to not holding the Post Office liable for what people mail, or the phone companies liable for what people say.
That "not" shouldn't be there. And it feels like there is something missing from this analogy. Perhaps it would be like "holding the post office responsible to stop mailing privileges for people wrongly accused of mailing fireworks."
Man, if you could prove a link like that, it'd be worth a Pulitzer. More commonly though, the most ardent supporters of prohibition are probably the private prison industry and law enforcement. Both get tons of money out of this and have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
If you eliminate 80% of their funding, they can only be 20% bad -- not enough revenue for as many machine guns, not revenue for as many grenades, not enough revenue to pay off all the cops, not enough revenue to pay all the "troops". This last one could be especially juicy because they'd have a little internal power struggle to keep what is left and hopefully would go nuts offing each other.
Cut out most of the money, and they'll shrink drastically. Once they get down to a certain size, they'll be easier to deal with. Suggesting that cutting off their funds would have no effect though, is nuts.
Next up was a Power Book.... Sure at first I was reluctant and the UI bothered me and I have messed up the system fairly bad because I wasn't doing things the easy way.
I had been using Linux for years when I got my first mac laptop. Early on, I decided I wanted to remove some items from the dock but there was no "right click, remove from dock" menu item. I then spent about three hours googling and rooting about till I found the text file that defined the items that would be in the dock, modified it, logged out/in and voila, dock fixed. I was pretty proud but also surprised at how difficult it was. Some days later I clumsily hold-clicked on a dock item and drug it off the dock -- poof, it was gone. I was shocked and had to laugh at myself.
Whatever platform you currently have and invested time in is probably good enough for you and switching isn't going to solve that many more problems.
Clearly true, but I would add, sometimes the effort is worth it.
1) Averted a second American Great Depression (stimulus package)
What, by giving bonuses to bankers who then didn't lend the money out?
2) Reformed Health Care to allow 30 million Americans access to it
You mean the "no insurance company left behind" act? Touting the public option while cutting a deal with the insurance lobby?
3) Increased government transparency (we may not like the answers provided)
Not even close. Obama has exceeded Bush II in classification of anything and everything.
4) Created a federal CIO
Uhhh -- whatever.
5) Ended stop-loss
OK
6) Wound down American troops in Iraq (aren't they supposed to be all gone by the end of the year?)
Unmitigated bullshit. We are getting out despite Obama, not because of. He lobbied Iraq to stay longer, they refused, so we are exiting on GWB's timetable. Talk about irony.
7) Ended don't ask/don't tell (Important because 140ish? translators fired under that program could have prevented or mitigated 9/11. The backlog in translations led to the orders to execute 9/11 being translated 2 days after the attacks)
After fighting for the policy for years, but OK.
8) CARD legislation to end predatory credit card practices
OK, but I'm saying that without looking into what really happened.
9) Committed to getting American troops out of Afghanistan
Is that why he took the 30k level when Bush left office to over 110k at one point?
10) Ordered U.S. troops to prevent a Libyan genocide at that hands of Ghaddafi (who claimed he would make the streets run red with blood) without loosing a single American life
Oh, you mean engaged in a war without even invoking the weak ass requirements of the war powers act further pushing us down the road to a Napoleonic presidency where the president all on his own can declare and fight wars all in violation of the separation of powers established in the US Constitution?
11) Ordered the capture/elimination of Osama bin Laden (successfully)
OK, but there are issues regarding Pakistani sovereignty that will likely bite us in the ass for a person who had become ineffectual.
12) Eliminated the head of al'Qaida in Yemen
You mean by deciding that as president, based purely on the assertions and allegations of the president, he has the right to try, convict, and execute an American in violation of the 5th Amendment. Quite the anti-achievement unless you are advocating for a dictatorship.
Notice that this article is almost 3 years old. In the present day, we have two people to thank for getting out of Iraq: George Bush, ironically, and whoever released the key Julian Assange's cache of cables. Obama was lobbying Iraq to stay longer but Iraq refused to extend the timetable setup by GWB. In other words, we are getting out DESPITE Obama, not because of him and he is holding in solitary the one person in this whole mess that deserves a peace prize way more than warmonger-Obama, providing Manning is the hero who helped bring us an end to Iraq by shining a light on war crimes.
So --- I wonder how many of the items in this list are pure BS like #4, and how many obscure acts are nothing more than list fodder.
Notice that this article is almost 3 years old. In the present day, we have two people to thank for getting out of Iraq: George Bush, ironically, and whoever released the key Julian Assange's cache of cables. Obama was lobbying Iraq to stay longer but Iraq refused to extend the timetable setup by GWB. In other words, we are getting out DESPITE Obama, not because of him and he is holding in solitary the one person in this whole mess that deserves a peace prize way more than warmonger-Obama, providing Manning is the hero who helped bring us an end to Iraq by shining a light on war crimes.
So --- I wonder how many of the items in this list are pure BS like #4, and how many obscure acts are nothing more than list fodder.
So? That certainly isn't dispositive as GPS is arguably quite different than beepers which required an officer to actually follow the person around. At least Justice Beyers gets that:
"The question that I think people are driving at, at least as I understand it and certainly share the concern, is that if you win this case then there is nothing to prevent the police or the government from monitoring 24 hours a day the public movement of every citizen of the United States," Breyer said.
Slashdot Mirror
Your definition of "not troubling" is pretty fucking evil:
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/23/wikileaks_cables_and_the_iraq_war/singleton/
just posting to this so I can find it again later easily. Brilliant post.
Here's a cite for you Mr. Head-in-the-Sand:
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/23/wikileaks_cables_and_the_iraq_war/singleton/
Sounds leak worthy to me.
Yep. I should have mentioned that. The fact that he lobbied Iraq to stay, really pours a big bucket of irony on the "change you can believe in" slogan.
Given that we won't be staying in Iraq in large part due to the leaks, the leak SAVED countless lives.
There is so much BS in your post I need a front end loader to get through it. Citations on my website.
1) While the war crime happened in 2006, Assange's cache of cables was only decrypted this summer. So while the news is old so to speak, it is fresh to the public.
2) Obama is a warmonger. For example,
(a) Bush launced 52 drone attacks. Obama has, in a much shorter period, launched 254. You think the GOP twisted his arm to do that?
(b) When Bush left office, there were about 30k troops in Afghanistan. Obama bumped that up to 112k at one point. That was Obama's choice?
(c) Obama is working hard to undermine the Convention on Cluster Munitions even though we aren't even a signatory? You gonna blame that on the GOP?
(d) And then there is Libya. Our founding fathers were well aware of the dangers posed by leaders who could both decide to go to war and then decide how to fight it. They all came from Europe which had suffered greatly under its kings. So they separate the war powers -- Congress got the right to declare it, the President the right to decide how to fight it. Since Korea, this has been ignored and then institutionalized in the War Powers Act. The crime in Libya is that Obama didn't even live up to his duties of the War Powers Act setting a precident that the President can unilaterally declare war. That is fucking huge. And no, his arm wasn't twisted by the GOP, but when future President Cheney arbitrarily attacks Iceland, remember to thank Obama.
3) Recognizing Obama as a neocon warmonger has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with his behavior. Bush was, until Obama embraced and extended his policies, the worst piece of shit this country had had for a president. The fact that Obama is African American however, cannot excuse him for being worse than Bush. Racism is supporting Obama DESPITE everything he has done just because he's not white.
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/23/wikileaks_cables_and_the_iraq_war/singleton/
Opinions don't deserve to be modded down just because they are opinions. If that is the standard, your opinion on opinions deserves to be modded down.
As for wifi in RV parks -- I'm not an RVer, nor do I desire to become one. However, people who go to RV parks aren't likely trying to connect with nature. They are more likely trying to "get away" much like people who use hotels do, except they have to do their own dishes and make their own beds. Some people are into that and some people are into sleeping in a tent, though some might whine about the latter group too -- seriously, people using sleeping bags? Shouldn't they be weaving temporary blankets out of bark strips?
Hey, at least that's ~1.25 fewer drones at $8m apiece flying around blowing up innocent people. I'm all for the US simply wasting money rather than wasting innocents and creating the conditions for more terrorism.
Don't be an idiot. There is real and material difference between your credit card data and friends, and committing war crimes. Some things have no public value (your CC number for example) and some are huge.
Because the neocons (Obama included) are pissed. They were worried the cables would reveal war crimes, which they did, and get us booted from Iraq, which they did. They want to go on using up our money to kill people for their own profit, and Assange, wikileaks, and everyone in that chain are throwing a monkey wrench in their plans.
1) The revalations stemming from decoding the wikileaks cache are directly responsible for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq: http://www.salon.com/2011/10/23/wikileaks_cables_and_the_iraq_war/singleton/
2) 4483 US Military Deaths in Iraq in the last 9 years (498/yr): http://icasualties.org/
3) Documented civilian deaths (probably very conservative): 100k+ (over 11k/year) http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Plainly, it SILENCE that would cause death and destruction. In such circumstances, it is immoral, inhumane, and evil to keep the information secret. If anything should be a capital crime, it should be the failure to reveal information where such failure results in 1000s of deaths.
When I google "killed because of leaked cables", I end up with this: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/02/cable-reveals-airstrike-killed-21-children-yemen/
But that's a story about our proud government killing 21 children in Yemen and how the information was contained in the cables. So instead of some theoretical bullshit about how the leak endangering soldiers, the truth is it will save 500 soldiers per year and we won't be responsible for 11,000 (min) civilian deaths per year in Iraq. Every person involved in leaking the cables deserves a Nobel Peace prize.
That "not" shouldn't be there. And it feels like there is something missing from this analogy. Perhaps it would be like "holding the post office responsible to stop mailing privileges for people wrongly accused of mailing fireworks."
Man, if you could prove a link like that, it'd be worth a Pulitzer. More commonly though, the most ardent supporters of prohibition are probably the private prison industry and law enforcement. Both get tons of money out of this and have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
If you eliminate 80% of their funding, they can only be 20% bad -- not enough revenue for as many machine guns, not revenue for as many grenades, not enough revenue to pay off all the cops, not enough revenue to pay all the "troops". This last one could be especially juicy because they'd have a little internal power struggle to keep what is left and hopefully would go nuts offing each other.
Cut out most of the money, and they'll shrink drastically. Once they get down to a certain size, they'll be easier to deal with. Suggesting that cutting off their funds would have no effect though, is nuts.
In Soviet Russia, Mars probes you
I had been using Linux for years when I got my first mac laptop. Early on, I decided I wanted to remove some items from the dock but there was no "right click, remove from dock" menu item. I then spent about three hours googling and rooting about till I found the text file that defined the items that would be in the dock, modified it, logged out/in and voila, dock fixed. I was pretty proud but also surprised at how difficult it was. Some days later I clumsily hold-clicked on a dock item and drug it off the dock -- poof, it was gone. I was shocked and had to laugh at myself.
Clearly true, but I would add, sometimes the effort is worth it.
Perhaps the difference is in automated exploits vs. skillful exploits.
1) Averted a second American Great Depression (stimulus package)
What, by giving bonuses to bankers who then didn't lend the money out?
2) Reformed Health Care to allow 30 million Americans access to it
You mean the "no insurance company left behind" act? Touting the public option while cutting a deal with the insurance lobby?
3) Increased government transparency (we may not like the answers provided)
Not even close. Obama has exceeded Bush II in classification of anything and everything.
4) Created a federal CIO
Uhhh -- whatever.
5) Ended stop-loss
OK
6) Wound down American troops in Iraq (aren't they supposed to be all gone by the end of the year?)
Unmitigated bullshit. We are getting out despite Obama, not because of. He lobbied Iraq to stay longer, they refused, so we are exiting on GWB's timetable. Talk about irony.
7) Ended don't ask/don't tell (Important because 140ish? translators fired under that program could have prevented or mitigated 9/11. The backlog in translations led to the orders to execute 9/11 being translated 2 days after the attacks)
After fighting for the policy for years, but OK.
8) CARD legislation to end predatory credit card practices
OK, but I'm saying that without looking into what really happened.
9) Committed to getting American troops out of Afghanistan
Is that why he took the 30k level when Bush left office to over 110k at one point?
10) Ordered U.S. troops to prevent a Libyan genocide at that hands of Ghaddafi (who claimed he would make the streets run red with blood) without loosing a single American life
Oh, you mean engaged in a war without even invoking the weak ass requirements of the war powers act further pushing us down the road to a Napoleonic presidency where the president all on his own can declare and fight wars all in violation of the separation of powers established in the US Constitution?
11) Ordered the capture/elimination of Osama bin Laden (successfully)
OK, but there are issues regarding Pakistani sovereignty that will likely bite us in the ass for a person who had become ineffectual.
12) Eliminated the head of al'Qaida in Yemen
You mean by deciding that as president, based purely on the assertions and allegations of the president, he has the right to try, convict, and execute an American in violation of the 5th Amendment. Quite the anti-achievement unless you are advocating for a dictatorship.
What exactly has he accomplished that is of any value?
How has he made the world a better place by his actions?
OOPS. This is in response to this: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2516170&cid=37998792
Notice that this article is almost 3 years old. In the present day, we have two people to thank for getting out of Iraq: George Bush, ironically, and whoever released the key Julian Assange's cache of cables. Obama was lobbying Iraq to stay longer but Iraq refused to extend the timetable setup by GWB. In other words, we are getting out DESPITE Obama, not because of him and he is holding in solitary the one person in this whole mess that deserves a peace prize way more than warmonger-Obama, providing Manning is the hero who helped bring us an end to Iraq by shining a light on war crimes.
So --- I wonder how many of the items in this list are pure BS like #4, and how many obscure acts are nothing more than list fodder.
It probably happened that someone forgot to make a payment and thus incurred a late fee, i.e., this veto. I'm sure it won't happen again.
Notice that this article is almost 3 years old. In the present day, we have two people to thank for getting out of Iraq: George Bush, ironically, and whoever released the key Julian Assange's cache of cables. Obama was lobbying Iraq to stay longer but Iraq refused to extend the timetable setup by GWB. In other words, we are getting out DESPITE Obama, not because of him and he is holding in solitary the one person in this whole mess that deserves a peace prize way more than warmonger-Obama, providing Manning is the hero who helped bring us an end to Iraq by shining a light on war crimes.
So --- I wonder how many of the items in this list are pure BS like #4, and how many obscure acts are nothing more than list fodder.
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/high-court-troubled-by-1219884.html