SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Update: DannyB adds: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/edward-snowden-nsa-cbs-this-morning-interview-today-2019-09-16/
When pressed on whether he considers what he did unlawful, Snowden refused to take a position but said "it's not hard to make the argument that I broke the law." He went on to say that the government continues to allege that his disclosures caused harm but, according to Snowden, has yet to show evidence of that harm.
"They never show evidence for it even though we're now more than 6 years on, it would be the easiest thing in the world to show. We've never heard that story," he said. "If they had some classified evidence that a hair on a single person's head was harmed, you know as well as I do, it would be on the front page of The New York Times by the end of the day."
Snowden also took issue with the common refrain that leaking classified documents violated the oath of secrecy he took upon entering the CIA. He said an oath of secrecy does not exist.
"One of the common misconceptions in one of the earlier attacks, that we heard in 2015, that we don't hear of so much anymore is that I violated this oath of secrecy. That does not exist. There is a secrecy agreement, but there is also an oath of service. An oath of service is to support and defend, not an agency, not even the president, it is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies – direct quote – foreign and domestic. And this begs the question, what happens when our obligations come into conflict."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by GlennC on Tuesday September 17 2019, @02:58PM (86 children)
Edward Snowden is an American hero.
Unfortunately, since his actions exposed and embarrassed the Powers That Be, he's got to be made an example of.
Sorry folks...the world is bigger and more varied than you want it to be. Deal with it.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:07PM
The tree of liberty needs some refreshment. Tyrants and patriots meet that need nicely. Alas, Snowden is a patriot, so he'll probably be chopped up for fertilizer, while the tyrants try to distract us with the cake and circus.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:15PM (82 children)
The clearest sign Obama was going to be bad was that when he took office he didn't instantly pardon snowden.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:24PM (10 children)
Bad is a relative thing... the real question is: what did Obama get in exchange for letting Snowden rot? Was that trade, on balance, better for the American people?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:08PM (9 children)
Almost certainly "being pragmatic about national security" which is a siren song for all politicians.
What you get for ignoring the right thing in the name of national security: a bunch of military types praising your good sense. All the talk shows that repeat military experts ad naseum on your side.
If something bad happens: Well you did the best you could.
What you get for doing the right thing: A few cynical people who care about their rights aren't unhappy. Some protection of the rights of all citizens against totalitarianism(worthless to you)
What happens when something goes wrong: "The universal spying program that caught nothing at all before would have stopped this attack. You hate america!"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:15PM (8 children)
In other words: Freedom is doomed, by design.
As the world shrinks / population and technology grows, there's a certain logical inevitability to this. We can't all move out to cabins in the wilderness, scribbling manifestos about how things should be, doing whatever it takes to get our message out to the people.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:30PM (7 children)
I don't believe in the rousseauian ideal. We don't need to avoid each other or social structures to be happy and free. Anarchy is a pipe dream of people who've never seen someone actively seek power. We do need to police our social structures and get rid of all the people who rubber-stamp injustices as "just how things are". Preferably by education.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @08:21PM (6 children)
So much for democracy - the majority, even the voting majority, tend toward the paths of least resistance which includes a great deal of accepting "just how things are."
Maybe if politics paid actual salaries, and enforced transparency to a degree that exposed and terminated corruption, we could get politicians who aren't in it for the power. As it is, the only reason to get into politics is to "get something done" for yourself, or people you care about, and even if that doesn't mean lining your own pockets at the beginning, sooner or later it becomes part of the operational landscape.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @08:26PM (5 children)
Bullshit. The "majority" doesn't tend any such way in some innate and intractable way.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @08:55PM (4 children)
Oh, you're going for full-on brainwashing toward revolutionary independent thinking tendencies, then?
It has taken centuries of the opposite to get where we are, and even before "public education" taught people to do as they are told, revolution was a very rare animal.
Maybe you can try this on a new planet if we find a habitable one...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @09:11PM (3 children)
There are so many societies on this planet that are nowhere near our level of social, economic, and political decay. None that are entirely free from some degree of apathy and misanthropy, but the US, today? Oh boy there's something special fucked up.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @09:43PM (2 children)
I'm a child of the '60s, my dad was lucky enough not to be drafted but he has devoted his entire life to reforming the education system in the US to promote independent thinking. PhD in education, department chairmanships, teaching teachers, setting state curriculum, writing books, etc. He is retiring this year, having Quixotically pursued his goals for 45 years - it would be redundant to say: to little effect.
The history that they teach in the US, at least, shows that wealth disparity, massive concentration of power in the hands of a few, etc. has been endemic to human society since the beginning of recorded history and has rarely been so "good" as it was in the early to mid 1970s - seemingly as a post WWII temporary guilt trip on the part of the power brokers, giving the returning vets' and their kids a break for almost a decade. Maybe it was a feeling of gratitude toward the soldiers for winning the "big one". Whatever, Ronnie's Ray-guns put a stop to all that nonsense and kicked Russia in the balls while they were at it.
May you fight the good fight, may you make more progress than my father did. He spent his whole career swimming against the tide.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by DECbot on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:27PM (1 child)
I wish it was like that. My thought, the Vets got home and observed how fucked up politics were and ran for a bunch of local offices. In the local elections, the soldiers often campaigned on anti-corruption platforms citing the fucked up things the sheriffs, judges, and county officials did during and right after the war. Things had to clean up or the Vets would win too many elections and later move into more powerful offices.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:44PM
Hmmm... that's a somewhat less cynical take, that "the people" actually grabbed ahold of democracy and put Vets in office who cared more about people than their own personal power. Not at all surprising that it was short lived, either way.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:26PM (64 children)
I notice that Trump hasn't pardoned Snowden, either.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:38PM (48 children)
Why would he? Snowden's not one of Trump's cronies, he doesn't have enough money.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:43PM (46 children)
Why would he? Only because it would be the "right thing to do".
I spend a lot of time here, mocking the people with TDS, in effect, kinda defending Trump. But, I have never claimed that Trump is a "good person". Such a person would recognize instantly that Snowden did the "right thing", and pardon him of any and all crimes associated with Snowden's disclosures.
It sucks that good people don't become president. We could use one, or even a dozen.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:49PM (44 children)
I get triggered by the term TDS.
What I often find is that people who mention TDS cannot handle any criticism of the president, even if legitimate, based on facts, or his own words or actions. It's almost as if someone is so uncomfortable that the president actually did or said something too embarrassing to admit, and so throw out TDS and blame the messenger for talking about it.
TDS is not an actual rebuttal. That is how I've come to view people who throw out the term TDS.
Trump followers (at least some) are like a religious cult. Trump cannot be seen in his own mind to ever make a mistake. Not even a minor one. And his acolytes seem to take that and run with it. Nothing, no matter how repulsive, offensive, disgusting can be questioned or criticized.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:21PM (19 children)
I think Trump is a egocentric manipulative piece of shit. But I also think TDS is real. The people with it literally cannot make a rational argument in this area.
A good test is his racist / sexist tweets. Politely ask them to link to one - just one - any single racist and/or sexist tweet from Trump. If they respond at all, you will get a link to an article saying Trump is a pig for making all these sexist tweets.
Point out that is a link to an opinion piece, can they link to a racist or sexist tweet please. Do it politely enough, and they will link to a different article saying Trump is a monster because he keeps making racist tweets.
Once again, politely point out that is a link to an article, not a tweet, can they link to a tweet please, and you will receive a torrent of abuse as an evil Nazi who supports Trump and clubs baby seals and shoult be hit over the head with a bike lock.
I've done this several times, I have not managed to get a single link to a racist or sexist tweet. It always descends into abuse. If it wasn't so depressing it would be hilarious.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:26PM (17 children)
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly......
Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
....and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how....
(Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:06PM (15 children)
That tweet isn't "racist". You gotta do better than that, Monkeyman. Trump did express contempt, but that contempt wasn't "racist" in nature. Trump referred to the products of failed nations, coming here, to influence our country to be more like the failed nations they come from. I can, and will, point out that a lot of those kind of people are Muslims - but Muslim is not a race.
It Trump prejudiced against Muslims? I think he probably is. Am I prejudiced against Muslims? Yeah, I am. But, Muslim is not a race, so that doesn't make Trump a racist, nor does it make me a racist.
Language has a purpose. See if you can't use the language for it's intended purpose, alright?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:17PM (4 children)
"Go back where you came from" is in the textbook definition of illegal discrimination. [thehill.com]
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:48PM (3 children)
*yawn*
If you don't love America, then you SHOULD go back where you came from. Note that your link is just an opinion piece which draws on something called "guidance" - as opposed to laws or regulations. And, note that strict adherence to that "guidance" stifles free speech. So, do you believe in free speech? No? Then, you won't mind voting for a new law that enables Trump to shut you up when you don't agree with him? What's that? Now you want your free speech? But you don't want to allow free speech for those you disagree with, like Trump? Interesting . . .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:05PM
Gee, and here I thought America was strong enough to allow people who might not be completely in love with it to have a voice and presence. Something about the allowance of dissent.
By the way, does that mean that we can send Trump back to New York to fix all of the problems there before we allow him to set foot in the White House again?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by vux984 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @07:58PM
"If you don't love America, then you SHOULD go back where you came from."
What exactly does that mean if you are from America?
3 of the 4 congresswomen he's talking about are born in america. But trump is right, his government is a complete and total catastrophe. And he's among the most inept world leaders around.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:47AM
Ummm... is it actually love if you refrain to point to the mistakes made by the subject of your love and expect it/her/him to correct them for the future? Really?
E.g. you think doing so would be "good parenting" for one's kids?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:25PM (1 child)
I personally think that tweet is racist, but that's just a difference of opinion.
I also must admit that I am prejudiced against Muslims and recognize that fact. I recognize there are Muslims who are fine people. My very large employer does employ people of various races, religions, etc. and I can work with them at any time. But my instinctive prejudice is still there when I don't know someone. It's there, and I recognize it is there, so I can try to not act upon it. I think it comes from the fact that I am pro-Israel. Not everyone will agree with me on that, but feel free to disagree.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:41PM
Wow. Salutes. My first few weeks in the Navy, we were taught that we all have our prejudices. We should all work to recognize our own, and to work around them. You get points for that. We need a helluva lot more people to do the same. THEN, we might put all these identity politics behind us. Those politics create problems that wouldn't exist without the politics.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:38PM (7 children)
Neither are Jews and most of the other people pigeonholed by the racists. If you are prejudiced against Muslims, you *are* a racist. If you are prejudiced against Jews, you *are* a racist. If you are prejudiced against (pick some group of otherwise normal people), you *are* a racist.
If you are arguing that you are not racist because these "others that clearly are not like me and I discriminate against" are not a race, then shall we then go to a term that you prefer? Like a bigot?
"noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions"
"bigoted
obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, and intolerant towards other people's beliefs and practices"
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:57PM (3 children)
You have made this post just to expose your ignorance?
Islam is a political/judicial/religious system. A Muslim is not required to be Arabic, or to be black, or to be brown, or to be anything at all. A Muslim is required to worship Allah according to the dictates of Mohammed, as interpreted by all the Imams and what-not.
Disliking, or even hating Islam is not, cannot, be "racism".
(Score: 3, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:05PM
rac·ism
/ˈrāˌsizəm/
noun
noun: racism
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
"a program to combat racism"
synonyms: racial discrimination, racialism, racial prejudice/bigotry, xenophobia, chauvinism, bigotry, bias, intolerance; More
anti-Semitism;
historicalapartheid
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
"theories of racism"
Race (human categorization)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about human races as a social concept and in anthropology. For the sociological concept, see Race and society. For "the human race" (all of humanity), see Human. For the term "race" in biology, see Race (biology). For belief that the human species is naturally divided into races, see Racialism.
A race is a grouping of humans based on shared physical or social qualities into categories generally viewed as distinct by society.[1] The term was first used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations. By the 17th century the term began to refer to physical (phenotypical) traits. Modern scholarship regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society. While partially based on physical similarities within groups, race is not an inherent physical or biological quality.[1][2]
*
Race and racial identification is more than just ethnicity or physiometric entities. It is entirely possible to single out a religion, gender, or sexual orientation and declare bigoted beliefs about them as racism.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Wednesday September 18 2019, @09:17AM (1 child)
Even knowing all this about Islam, and still you are a fuching redneck hillbilly racist, Runaway1912! I am going to prey for you soul. For bait, I will use Trump. For vanes, I will use Democrats. For the end, I will use the abyss. You have stared into the abyss, Runaway? And did it not also stare into you? Your kind of "rural" American emptiness is the consequence of slavery and genocide, a purely destructive path, much like Fox News rebounding from the "Land Down Under" and the Assimilation Laws, that once it has achieved its objective, becomes purely and self-referentially destructive. The South will Lose Again.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 20 2019, @01:56PM
Many people have stared into the abyss, as you should know. Many people blink. Some don't. In my case, the abyss blinked.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday September 17 2019, @07:07PM
Yes, exactly: If you mean "bigot", use the word "bigot." You can't be racist against things that aren't races.
Words have meanings people
"Jewish" is more problematic because depending on context people use it to refer to your religion, ancestry, and/or culture, and usually in a very blurry way.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1) by DECbot on Tuesday September 17 2019, @11:40PM (1 child)
I'm just going to pile on here to attempt to show a point.
To continue your train of thought, if you hate Christians then you are a racist. If you hate atheists, then you are a racist.
&nbps;
Now let me be blunt. My belief, religion is not a race. But if you insist that it is, then American society should stop hating Jews, Muslims, Christians, and atheists because that would be racist.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @09:19AM
I hate dances pretending to be alternative to butter spreads. That's what I hate. Call me racist if you must.
Brought to you by Rhumbavegimite.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:35PM
No link. QED.
However, being the tolerant fellow I am and making allowances for the deathmonkey's TDS I used DDG to find it.
DDG brings up that as 1 and 2 of 3 connected tweets. Full text:
Can you explain which bit is racist? It is nationalistic, disparaging and condescending, all standard political rhetoric. Or maybe that was a sexist example because he called them "congresswomen".
Or possibly you have an aversion to run-on sentences which while laudable in itself, when called out in others does not rise to the level of racism or sexism despite it being a characteristic of a much un-loved president in whose case I think it is more a representation of a stream of consciousness, as much as he can be said to be conscious, rather than, as in some people, a demonstration of the ability to hold complex and interesting concepts while simultaneously articulately expounding said concepts especially in a medium which is much used by said president regardless of the fact that the character limit inevitably means that the text will be broken up even though it is all one long sentence.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:47PM
I never have and never will use Twitter. Nor Facebook. So I would be unable to provide you with an example. But then, I probably wouldn't be one talking about his racist / sexist tweets, unless I had seen some evidence of them somewhere else.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:52PM (1 child)
TDS is specifically used to describe the people who are ignoring reality because they are so clouded by their hatred of him. On example,
Do you believe he said that the neo-Nazis are fine people? If so, you have TDS
Good write-up if you are still afflicted
https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/04/30/the-fine-people-hoax-funnel/ [scottadamssays.com]
TDS is over used and often used in the same way leftists will say "full stop" or "period" to end arguments. But there are valid cases out there of people distorting reality.
(Score: 1) by catholocism on Tuesday September 17 2019, @07:56PM
wait "...the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats - you had a lot of bad people in the other group too" Was he talking about the cops? Cause that's how they were rolling.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:58PM (14 children)
And, I get off on triggering people. ;^) It's part of that "asocial asshole" thing.
As good, and as bad, as Trump is, Trump has replaced GWB for the dems in this country. It was Bush's fault that Hurricane Katrina hit the US, Bush's fault that the Dems in charge of Louisiana were total fuckups, Bush's fault for EVERYTHING. Trump now fills that slot - and if you don't believe me, just tune in to CNN. If unicorns began shitting cotton candy onto every elementary school in America, it would be Trump's fault. That is the sort of thing I refer to when I talk about TDS. Far too large a percentage of Trump haters are just batshit fucking INSANE.
Want to criticize Trump? Go for it. Keep it rationale, and you're likely to find me agreeing with you. If you go 'round the bend like the joke anchors at CNN, you'll only see me mocking you.
Note, from my previous post, that I DO NOT think Trump is a "good guy". The first time I ever saw that arrogant cocksucker on television, I told the wife that I'd punch the sumbitch in the nose if he talked to me like that. My personal opinion of the man has not improved one iota since that day. I think that's why I get so pissed when the D's deify him, or demonize him, which amounts to the same thing.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:32PM (10 children)
Jerry Fallwell says it was the fault of the gays.
Heh, I gave up CNN in 2013, see related posts in this SN topic.
While I recognize that supporters of Party A will always see the current Party B president as filling the slot of the bad Party B villain, I think Trump is a new and unique phenomena. Some of this past thinking does not apply. Trump has lowered all sorts of bars to where there is no dignity left. This totally does not compare with GWB. I did not vote for GWB, but I would take him back in a heartbeat over Trump. I at least have some respect for GWB and believe that GWB is sane, even if I disagree with policies. So saying Trump now fills the slot really just does not properly describe it.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:37PM (4 children)
Yeah, I read your other comments about CNN. Good move there.
Oddly, I believe Trump to be less - uhhhmmm - "evil" than Bush. Definitely less evil than the evil brain in the Bush-Cheney team. Even so, at best, Trump is a real shithead.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:44PM (2 children)
Less Evil and Less Dangerous are two different things.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:03AM (1 child)
Can you provide a list of the wars/hot conflicts that Trump has started? Because there have been many incidents that would have lead to war/police actions/hot conflict under prior administrations.
Venezuela protest squashing
Iran tanker bombing
Iran shooting down the drone
Iran funding a group that blew up some oil in Saudi Arabia
You say dangerous but at Trump rallies his supporters cheer for peace in the Korean peninsula, no new foreign entanglements, pulling out of Afghanistan and Syria, and de-taunt with Iran and Russia.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:45PM
That misses my real concern. It's not about what he hasn't done. It's what he could do.
From my perspective, I see it as putting nuclear weapons into the hands of an insane crazy person who is incredibly vindictive and petty, and changes his positions on things depending on which way the wind blows that day.
Now I might be right or I might be wrong. But I would rather have a more stable person as president. I didn't vote for GWB, and I disagree with many of his policies. But I have a level of respect for GWB (none for Trump) and would gladly have GWB back in Trump's place in a heartbeat. So it's not simply an R versus D thing.
It's one of: I think Trump is dangerous.
Right or wrong, it is an opinion.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday September 17 2019, @07:02PM
On some level you need to know what you're doing to be evil.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:48AM (4 children)
People need to stop rehabilitating war criminals like George Bush just because Trump looks bad. Trump is a typical Republican, plus mean tweets and noticeable cognitive decline. That's it. His policies are corporatist, pro-war, and anti-freedom, just like other Republicans.
Bush got us into Iraq based on false pretenses (which weren't a valid reason to invade a country even if they were true), which was an illegal war against a country that didn't attack us, and as a result, hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed. Then we also had the Unpatriotic Act, torture (thanks Barack 'Look forward, not back!' Obama!), gitmo, mass surveillance, and so on. Do you really think that Trump is much worse than that? Really?
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:55AM (3 children)
Citation needed. He has initiated less conflicts than anyone going back to Carter.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday September 19 2019, @02:14AM (2 children)
"Locked and loaded."
"Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!"
Military parade for Independence Day.
“I’m the most militaristic person there is.”
That's enough so far. Hopefully the rest of the world keeps seeing him as a clown before he accidentally starts a shooting war. Most wars only need a pretext to set off.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday September 19 2019, @03:42AM (1 child)
Lots of shitty words but less killing than any president since Carter, what actual ACTIONS have occured?
Hell, Bolton is now running around freaking out because Trump isnt a warmonger and upset that Trump doesnt want to bomb Venezuela, wanted to not kill more Afghanis, didn't want to kill more Yemenese, or Syrians, and called off killing 40-400 Iranians.
Ill take Bolton, a self-professed warmonger, than fake news media trying to strum up conflict with Russia because they can't handle losing an election.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday September 19 2019, @04:04PM
I could look at a few things like...
Raid on Yalka [wikipedia.org], and when was the last time overt military action was approved in Yemen?
Bombing Syria [thehill.com].
Extreme vetting [cbsnews.com], which has the net effect of showing America as having sticks and not olive branches.
A failure to pull out of Afghanistan so far [nbcnews.com], he's had three years. Maybe he'll make it yet, we'll see. But allowance of this to continue is acquiescence to what has been happening whether he started it or not. Ditto for all the other conflicts he hasn't gotten us out of. Not exactly a peacemaker, unless you have evidence to the contrary?
Using Military funds for his beautiful Wall, therefore the ethics of which suggest he sees little difference between the two.
And now we have a deteriorating situation in Iran. Let's see where this one goes.
In any event, he's talking the talk [rt.com]. When somebody walks the walk on him, because his gut call was wrong, that will be on his watch. And it will be his fault.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:40PM (2 children)
"Keep it rational"
You first asshole, you start off with "As good, and as bad, as Trump is..."
Fucking lawl, you disavow him ONLY because otherwise you'd get labeled "batshit crazy" you "both sides"" creep of a human being.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:53PM
More like "neither side". I'm a registered Independent, because I don't like either party. That's right, bubba, way back in 1970, I started to dislike the dicks in both parties. By 1974, when I was old enough to vote, I had decided that I couldn't register with either party. Independent - meaning I have no loyalty to either of your two parties in this fucked up "two-party-system".
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @06:33PM
It is possible to not be completely totally polarized on everything political.
Despite all the horrible things I think about Trump (due to his own words and actions), I can still be pleased that he is pro Israel and apparently pro Christian, even if I have my doubts about whether he himself is a Christian. But I cannot really know either way. I can only go by his own words. "I've never asked God for forgiveness", etc.
Other than that, I disagree with and/or am disgusted and repulsed by everything else he says and does.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:22AM (6 children)
Trump is far from being a great President, but TDS is real. Just as SJWs are real. Both labels are thrown around too much, but it doesn't mean they don't exist.
If Trump manages to win a second term, the TDS will skyrocket and become plain to see.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:38AM (3 children)
Was Obama Derangement Syndrome a thing, too?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:07AM (1 child)
https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents [npr.org]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/02/28/news-coverage-of-trump-is-really-really-negative-even-on-fox-news/ [washingtonpost.com]
https://www.forbes.com/2009/11/14/fox-news-barack-obama-media-opinions-contributors-s-robert-lichter.html [forbes.com]
Fox News mainline news program was kinder to Obama than Trump.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 20 2019, @06:46AM
So the people saying that Obama was a muslim and from Kenya didn't have Obama Derangement Syndrome?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:08AM
Absolutely. Both are/were real phenomena.
The White House occupant doesn't really affect most Americans in an overtly positive or negative way.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 18 2019, @05:28PM (1 child)
When Trump gets his third term, TDS will blast out of orbit!
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19 2019, @12:15AM
We'll have a propulsion system capable of getting us to Mars that doesn't rely on the never to be completed SLS, or giving Elon Musk kingship over Mars!
(Score: 3, Touché) by etherscythe on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:35PM
Sure, the people with lots of Total Dissolved Solids [cnn.com] in their water might seem more likely to vote Democrat [wikipedia.org] than they are to vote Trump. I hardly see how that's relevant though. </sarcasm>
"Fake News: anything reported outside of my own personally chosen echo chamber"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by meustrus on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:55PM
Too true. Given the current context, it's about time to stop bitching about all the good things Obama failed to do.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 5, Informative) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:50PM (8 children)
No, in fact, trump re-arrested the hero that Obama eventually pardoned.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:20PM
Trump's Secretary of State wants Snowden DEAD.
Why CIA Nominee Mike Pompeo Wants to Kill Edward Snowden [inverse.com]
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:09PM (6 children)
I presume you're talking about Bradley Manning? He may be YOUR hero. I don't have enough vile words to describe the soldier or sailor who betrays his brethren. The fact that you can equate Manning and Snowden exposes your ignorance.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:23PM (5 children)
"Betraying breathren" by sharing videos of war crimes.
Fuck you you monster.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:42PM (4 children)
You should first learn what a "war crime" is. Manning exposed no war crimes. Go read the Geneva conventions, then get back to me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:54AM (3 children)
So killing innocent people, then killing the first responders, and then laughing about it is a-okay, then. Okay. That seems like a worthy cause to blow the whistle over to me, though.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:52PM (2 children)
There were no "innocents" in the armed group which the reporter accompanied. The "embedded" journalist, who didn't want to be embedded with US troops, instead choosing to embed himself in an insurgent unit. The man had more balls than I have, and I regret that he was killed. But, he knowingly took his chances.
First responders. That really sucked. Double sucks that there were kids in the car. But - where was the big Red Cross or Red Crescent on the first responder's vehicle? Or, even just plain old ambulance markings?
Like I have already said, go read the Geneva Conventions. Learn WTF you're talking about, instead of parroting some left wing talking points.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 20 2019, @06:52AM (1 child)
If they weren't an 'insurgents,' then they were necessarily innocents.
Yeah, just kill everyone if they supposedly can't be positively identified! And then the soldiers laughed about what happened, like the innocents they were. Hilarious.
If the Geneva Convention allows atrocities like this, then it needs to be updated. The "left wing talking points" are all about opposing wars against countries that didn't attack us, most of which that are going on now are illegal and/or unconstitutional. Killing innocent people and then massacring the first-responders is also a no-no.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 20 2019, @01:49PM
Nobody here claimed that the soldiers were innocents. Some, even many, may remain innocent for awhile after leaving boot camp. That doesn't last when you go into a combat zone.
And, again, it was not an "atrocity", any more than it was a "war crime". That Apache engaged an insurgent unit, and destroyed it. Sucks that the embedded reporter was also killed, but that IS life. The only bit of that video that might be remotely related to a war crime or an atrocity, is shooting up the van. But, if you've bothered to read the conventions, you know by now that rendering aid to combatants in a war zone makes you a combatant. If you haven't yet read the conventions, do so before you stuff your foot in your face some more.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:55PM
I had the idea that the power of the pardon was a mechanism to correct injustices.
The pattern I observe with Trump is that an actual pardon, or a potential promised pardon is for a deliberate willful violation of law or due process that Trump happens to like. As in promising a pardon if you commit certain crimes for him. Or a law enforcement official, of all people, violating a lawful court order.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:17PM (4 children)
“He should be brought back from Russia and given due process, and I think the proper outcome would be that he would be given a death sentence,” - Mike Pompeo, United States Secretary of State
Imagine if SOS Clinton had said something like that!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:04PM (3 children)
At this point what difference does it make
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:19PM (2 children)
It continues to demonstrate what massive hypocrites these folks are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:32PM (1 child)
If Pompeo got a call at 2am that an embassy was under attack he wouldn't have gone back to sleep. I am not a fan of the guy but he seems to actually do his job, as disagreeable a job as it is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:57AM
If he were doing his job, he would be defending the US Constitution against enemies, foreign or domestic. These authoritarian goons are not doing that, and in fact actively oppose the highest law of the land, as we see with the whole Snowden situation.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:43PM (5 children)
Obama took office Jan 20, 2009. Then again in 2013.
Snowden's revelations were May 20, 2013.
Obama, the entire administration, took the position Snowden was a traitor instead of a hero. CNN stepped right in line with the administration. That is when I completely cut off watching CNN, and have never gone back. Amazing how much time I got back. I almost dropped CNN when they failed to cover, but also were supporters of SOPA. CNN's total failure to even make a pretense of objectivity is what pushed me over the edge.
Off topic: I also realized how much of a black hole for time that CNN and other news media really are. BREAKING NEWS. But after the break will be this interesting story . . . yeah . . . after the break and at the very end of the hour will be that story, and it will be a fizzle rather than what was implied. Everything is BREAKING NEWS. The most frivolous new fact is BREAKING NEWS.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ikanreed on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:52PM (2 children)
Man, my mental order of events was all wrong. This comic came out 5 years before Snowden [thisishistorictimes.com]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:58PM
As I get older, I find I sometimes mis-remember events. I try to remember specific dates that go with those events to help keep them straight. Or I can use the amazing power of google. :-)
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Tuesday September 17 2019, @05:16PM
Thank you for that link.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by meustrus on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:17PM (1 child)
If it took you evidence of political bias to stop watching CNN, you are the problem. The reason not to watch CNN is because it's just low quality journalism.
They chase eyeballs, not headlines. They are very careful to avoid offending advertisers. If something seems controversial, they either won't report on it, or they will take the establishment side.
Meanwhile, people are making a false dichotomy between CNN and Fox News. They are not opposites. In many important ways, they serve the same masters. Your preference comes down to whether you prefer some explicit right-wing bias in your news or a laughably thin pretense of objectivity.
You're getting pro-corporate bias either way, whether it's the bias against government regulation or the bias in favor of expanding the labor pool to include more women, minorities, and immigrants. Oh, and also bias in favor of the very profitable military industrial complex. Which is what this whole "intelligence" scheme is really about.
CNN is crap. That's not a political statement. It's a criticism of its journalism. Luckily, we have access to so many less-filtered sources now. Unfortunately, less-filtered sources means that trash and propaganda is mixed in too. CNN at least filters some of the crap and sticks to US propaganda, but it also filters out lots of real news that displeases its corporate overlords. If you want better, you need to work for it.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 17 2019, @04:41PM
I didn't stop watching CNN because of any politics. But because of its journalism. I did say . . .
CNN had no objectivity about Snowden. They took one side. It was in line with the then current Obama administration and military.
I then pointed out a 2nd instance from earlier which almost, but just didn't quite push me to stop watching. That was SOPA. On the day when all the major internet sites had black pages "the internet went dark", brought national attention to SOPA. Suddenly all congress critters who were behind it now distanced themselves from it. Everyone could read about how bad SOPA actually was, and it wasn't just a secret back room thing anymore. But CNN totally ignored this newsworthy item.
So that's two instances I point out of bad journalism. SOPA almost made me stop watching CNN. Snowden pushed me over the edge.
I might (but won't) say I might agree with CNN's politics actually, but I don't watch them any more, so I can't say that -- and I don't see them as objective at all, and thus can't trust their politics even if I might agree.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by DECbot on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:30PM (1 child)
I don't disagree with you. However, he's an idiot--a smart idiot. Snowden is clairvoyant enough to be concerned for a fair trial, but to lay bare your defensive arguments to the press before trial... I'm sure the prosecution will have now one example of some brown person (aka informant) getting droned because of Snowden. It doesn't even have to make sense, it just has to show the US suffered damage because of his disclosure. I'm also sure they will find some document that he signed regarding safeguarding classified documents. You know, the standard type form that you sign in exchange for your security clearance.
Let me go back to the "show serious harm to the US" argument. They government doesn't have to show that a person or property was harmed by the disclosure, they can successfully argue that the reputation of the US government was harmed. The reason the whole operation was classified was because it is likely unconstitutional. By disclosing that the government was involved in performing illegal actions by surveying private citizens without a warrant, it caused serious harm to the government's reputation as a free republic. It makes no difference that the government was involved in wrongdoing, he caused harm to the US government by disclosing classified documents. Do I disagree with that judgement? You bet I do, but that won't give Snowden leniency unless I am on that jury. I think the government should be barred from classifying illegal or unconstitutional activity performed by the government. Military and State Departments opinions, military hardware specifications, military operations, or private citizens private data should totally be classified. Embarrassing mistakes or unconstitutional actions should not be grounds for classification.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 17 2019, @03:55PM
The issue is that in prosecution under the Espionage Act, he is FORBIDDEN from explaining why he did it. This is unlike any other trial and why he can't get a fair trial. It isn't about a nebulous reputational harm to the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/30/daniel-ellsberg-snowden-fair-trial-kerry-espionage-act [theguardian.com]