Jump to content

Sawbonz

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    10881
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by Sawbonz

  1. I believe there are several posts in this thread suggesting he is going to jail. Maybe I am misreading that. He surely deserves anything and everything coming his way though 

  2. 49 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    So you feel entitled to know everything all the time and see no value in state secrets?

    Because if that’s the case, we wouldn’t be able to do things like hunt down Osama bin Laden, break up huge international crime syndicates, or combat international cyber threats.

    And if it weren’t for that traitor Ellsberg we would have won that Vietnam war

  3. Obviously hannity is an unethical piece of shit and in no way a credible journalist, and should have been fired for any one of the things that have come out this week but in what way are his dealings with Cohen illegal?  I get that he could be guilty of some financial crimes for not disclosing ownership in financial vehicles he was pitching, but the Cohen stuff isn’t that is it?

  4. 9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Wikileaks does create a risk of making some bad - or at least suboptimal - Law.

     

    First, is it an actual instrument of “the press?” There’s been much litigation of this point in these days of citizen journalists. I tend to lean strongly to the side of “if you’re recording or gathering info to share with the public, you’re performing a journalistic function.” The problem is...imagine a straight up, paid FSB agent is over here doing that. He’s nabbing secret military documents. He’s getting intel on planned troop movements. He’s got someone tapping the President’s phone. And he passes that along to his buddy, FSB agent 2, who publishes it on his blog, which gets tweeted and retweeted far and wide (helped by Russian bots, of course). Is that a journalistic organization? Or is it a foreign intel and disinformation operation?

     

    Second, kind of what I said at the end. We generally allow the press to publish info brought to them, even when the provider obtained the info illegally (leaks, pentagon papers, exposes of corporate wrongdoing, etc). Almost always, these folks are “insiders,” or at least Americans. What about now, when the party that obtained the info is a hostile foreign intelligence service?

     

    How would we feel if an FSB agent stole the info I outlined above, and instead of giving it to his FSB buddy for his blog, he delivered it the the NYT. And they published it, knowing who he was and how he got it?

     

    I think it comes down to a question of whether Wikileaks is a press organization, or a foreign intel mouthpiece. And I imagine that’s gonna be fuzzy as shit.

     

    I suspect that the real solution is, as it has always been, extra-legal. When foreign intel activities overreach acceptable boundaries of espionage, some folks need to wake up dead. Big problem though...when your CINC is compromised by the very hostile power that we’re dealing with...yeah...

     

    Back to my scotch on the deck of the titanic.

     

    You are touching on what I find the most fascinating aspect of all of this as it relates to intel and propaganda wars. To my knowledge that shit has never been dealt with in criminal or civil courts. We are basically indicting and extraditing, or trying to sue, spies. In the Cold War and prior, we would try to identify them and either feed them false intel or turn them, while they were attempting the same with ours.

    Particularly dangerous ones would be exterminated presumably, while those who were publicly outed would be detained and swapped if caught on our turf, or barred from entry if outed while on foreign soil. I guess with most shenanigans occurring via the net the courts are the most practical avenue?  Tom Clancy would not approve 

    • Like 3
  5. I already addressed this on the old site but Daniel Ellsberg does not agree with you 

    He has spoken at length about (and in this piece with) ES

    Quote

    I once read a statement by Ed Snowden that there are things worth dying for. And I read the same thing by Manning, who said she was ready to go to prison or even face a death sentence for what she was doing. And I read those comments and I thought: that is what I felt. That is right. It is worth it. Is it worth someone’s freedom or life to avert a war with North Korea? I would say unhesitatingly: “Yes, of course.” Was it worth Ed Snowden spending his life in exile to do what he did? Was it worth it for Manning, spending seven and a half years in prison? Yes, I think so. And I think they think so. And I think they are right.

    https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/16/is-whistleblowing-worth-prison-or-a-life-in-exile-edward-snowden-talks-to-daniel-ellsberg

     

    Quote

    Snowden was the one person in the fucking NSA who did what he absolutely should have done

    https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/375031/

    the Atlantic article has a partial transcript of this

     

    • Like 3
  6. Our rep system is socialist. And like any pure socialist system, when artificial controls are placed on the market, black markets arise to increase supply; in this case socks are created solely for purposes of repping

  7. 24 minutes ago, softlynow said:

    Ah yes, both sides.

    If we're going to go back to where we lost the plot, though, that'd be the Reagan Revolution. All the economic policies that made America actually great started getting undone about then. And in the spirit of our aside, let me be repetitive about the reason: the me-now Boomers started voting themselves all the benefits, while denying future generations the advantages that propped them up. True leftism is non-existent as a ballot-box option. Despite the negatives of that side of the spectrum in the extreme, when it's not there at all, we get the Gilded Age Part III.

    You think this refutes anastasis’s ongoing narrative how? 

  8. 8 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

    It’s just Anastasis with his usual bullshit. He’s just so cool cuz he doesn’t care about either side, while agreeing with team trump 99% or the time.

    This is bullshit and you know it. Anyone who isn’t slobbering all over themselves, carrying pitchforks or torches is “agreeing with team trump” gtfo

     

    link a quote to something anastasis has said that supports trump 

  9. 21 hours ago, Amos Moses said:

    I'm trying to figure out how this Hugo guy posts nothing that is related to or even tangential to UT, yet dominates the board.  Weird.  Can we vote him off if he can't recite from memory the call from Steelers Roll Left? 

    Thanks trump

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...