Jump to content

US Politics - or: How I Learned to Love the Atomic Don


Martell Spy

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Then felons should be voting. Yet there is no significant "calling out" of these people that are stripped away of their right to vote. A policy that fits your criteria of affecting minorities at a higher level. So yeh, I'm not seeing any righteousness here, just people that want to win elections and have power. 

And again, your charges against me and my "tactics" are extremely vague. Not sure what this widely accepted truth I'm denying is. 

Hmm, so minorities are akin to felons? Felons lose their right to vote as part of the punishment they suffer for the crimes they commit. What crime did the minorities commit to lose this right? 

 I couldn't be more clear here. You are a human Merry-Go-Round. Your method of argument consists of nonsense definitions, false equivalencies and willful misunderstanding. It is pointless to attempt to have a meaningful conversation with you. My forehead is bloodied from attempting to do so.

 monty%20python%20general%20too%20silly_z

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

I believe there's a lot of science that is politicized for gain. 

Take climate change, I'm a firm believer in it. At the same time I don't consider myself any better than anyone else due to my belief. A certainly don't consider politicians any more moral just for believing in it, there is outrageous money to be made on the back of climate change and that alone makes me not trust politics to be moral and have the best interest of future generations.

Yeah, there's a ton of business opportunity and jobs to be made in green energy and other industries that would help combat climate change. Though oddly the party of business doesn't seem to realize that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Hmm, so minorities are akin to felons? Felons lose their right to vote as part of the punishment they suffer for the crimes they commit. What crime did the minorities commit to lose this right? 

 I couldn't be more clear here. You are a human Merry-Go-Round. Your method of argument consists of nonsense definitions, false equivalencies and willful misunderstanding. It is pointless to attempt to have a meaningful conversation with you. My forehead is bloodied from attempting to do so.

 monty%20python%20general%20too%20silly_z

 

You said that the ideal is to have everyone express their view with a vote.

Felons are stripped away of this right. 

Felons are disproportionately represented by minorities, which you said was a criteria for racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BloodRider said:

Yes, but publishing or trafficking in credit card numbers or other personal financial information is.  And this he did do, and has admitted to it, in a very big "fuck you, yes I meant to do that" kinda way.  The US certainly has more than enough to issue an arrest warrant.

Hmm I was forgetting that. This was much more recent, in the last year or so right? Proving his actual involvement rather than some other random thats currently running wikileaks might be a challenge for the prosecution, but I'm certainly fine with being nailed on that. I'm not sure how you'd even determine the US is the right jurisdiction, or if not where the right one is, as I'm sure that one would be an issue in more places than just the US and Australia might be the appropriate court to charge him on it. Again this is for an actual crime though, zero issues with getting him on that. Just have issues with "piss us off and we can get you".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

Yeah, there's a ton of business opportunity and jobs to be made in green energy and other industries that would help combat climate change. Though oddly the party of business doesn't seem to realize that...

I think a lot of the climate change denying isn't actually denying the science it's just a lack of faith in politics to really do anything about it.

The fear from a lot of people I talk to is just the government will just slap these ridiculous and unnecessary taxes and restrictions in the name of climate change on everything then go irresponsibly misuse the tax dollars on nonsense.

Not that this excuses anything but I don't think the narrative that "science is bullshit"  is totally accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Hmm I was forgetting that. This was much more recent, in the last year or so right? Proving his actual involvement rather than some other random thats currently running wikileaks might be a challenge for the prosecution, but I'm certainly fine with being nailed on that. I'm not sure how you'd even determine the US is the right jurisdiction, or if not where the right one is, as I'm sure that one would be an issue in more places than just the US and Australia might be the appropriate court to charge him on it. Again this is for an actual crime though, zero issues with getting him on that. Just have issues with "piss us off and we can get you".

Ohhhh yeah, this is actually a really good point. It's also worth noting that at the same time he posted the DNC leaks without redacting social security/credit card numbers, he posted leaks from Turkey that didn't redact the personal financial information for Turkish AKP donors. (As was the case with the DNC leaks, this also includes small-scale AKP donors.) Hell, if we really wanted to be bastards we should just tell everyone that he should be extradited to Erdogan's Turkey. It'd be interesting to see how long he lasts there. :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Hmm I was forgetting that. This was much more recent, in the last year or so right? Proving his actual involvement rather than some other random thats currently running wikileaks might be a challenge for the prosecution, but I'm certainly fine with being nailed on that. I'm not sure how you'd even determine the US is the right jurisdiction, or if not where the right one is, as I'm sure that one would be an issue in more places than just the US and Australia might be the appropriate court to charge him on it. Again this is for an actual crime though, zero issues with getting him on that. Just have issues with "piss us off and we can get you".

I agree with you that he really hasn't done anything worthy of being arrested by the US. And for it's part the US has not charged Assange with any crime, nor requested his extradition. He is not hiding from America, he's hiding from sexual assault allegations. Sure he claims he's scared Sweden will extradite him, but he lived openly in the UK for months and was not extradited. He's using being scared of the US as a smokescreen for weaseling out of his crimes committed in Sweden. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WinterFox said:

As usual, you're on top of it from my perspextive. Fuck Snowden and fuck Assange, sorry Karradin but U.S. law is best law :P

Snowden fleeing justice tells me he committed a criminal act in his own mind and Assange committed espionage against this state. If his country wants to defend his actions I get it, hiding in an embassy for years on end is not acceptable.

 

I have to admit that I have some bias.  In the mid to late 60s, I was on the faculty of the Army Intelligence School, which at that time, was at Ft. Holabird, MD and later moved to Ft. Huachuca, AZ, where Manning received her training.  I feel a sense of betrayal that someone who took the same oath I did, violated it.  My first training in the intelligence field was counterintelligence, so I have always had the mindset that safeguarding intelligence information is paramount.

4 hours ago, karaddin said:

I think Assange is a piece of shit, but unless something more compelling comes out I have very major issues with any incarceration for him by the US. He's not a US citizen and as far as I can recall there has been no accusation he's done anything on US soil. For a foreign national to receive information that is classified in the US and then publish it is not a crime and the US reaching its long arm around the world to impose its laws on others is terrifying as a non-American. If he lands in the US and has broken your laws in doing this then OK, but extraditing him without him having been in the US for any of these alleged crimes or passing through the US is just not OK.

The lawyers will probably tell me I'm full of crap, but Assange was actively soliciting information he knew was not the property of those who provided it to him.  I see him as an accessory to a theft that occurred in the US, even though he did not set foot in it.  We live in the digital age, where one can commit a crime in a country, even though one is not physically in that country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.vox.com/2017/1/18/14314526/obama-trump-not-normal

Obama’s parting message is a warning for Donald Trump
His memo to Trump: If you do any of these things, I won’t stay silent.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/obama-foreign-policy-legacy-ben-rhodes-donald-trump-china-iran-214642

Price had the power to sell his healthcare stock
The HHS nominee’s agreement with his stockbroker appears to contradict the Trump transition’s defense of his trades.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/tom-price-healthcare-stock-conflicts-233823


DeVos becomes social media sensation after bumpy hearing

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/betsy-devos-education-viral-social-media-233787

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DunderMifflin said:

Because...you say so? 

No. Because on the one hand, we have an orange: a sweeping statement made by you about accusations of racism in general. And on the other hand, we have a bunch of apples: the whole spectrum of accusations of racism, which will vary widely in how justified and well founded they are, whether they are general or specific, whether they apply to one incident or many, involve individuals or institutions, direct racism or indirect, egregious and open racism or more subtle expressions of bias, whether they are made genuinely or cynically, and on a whole range of other factors.

And for some reason, you want to draw a comparison between the former and the latter, as if it were not totally ridiculous to compare two completely different things (or one thing and a whole group of other things, to be strictly accurate). You want me to make a sweeping statement about accusations of racism to match yours, so that you can wave away the criticism as just as dumb as your original statement. That won't fly, though. Sorry.

9 hours ago, Swordfish said:

You have to wonder, under the circumstance, if he knew that commuted sentence was coming somehow.  

The timing is fairly interesting.

Not really seeing why you would wonder this?

The sequence of events is pretty clear. Assange says he'll give himself up if Manning is freed (some time ago). He recently repeats this assertion. Manning's sentence is commuted. Assange blusters about standing by what he said, then claims that technically it didn't meet his conditions.

Why would we assume that there's anything more to this than a guy making a promise he thought he'd never have to keep, then backing out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Obama’s parting message is a warning for Donald Trump
His memo to Trump: If you do any of these things, I won’t stay silent.

I think Obama overestimates the number of people who like to hear a former President commenting on the policies of a current one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, mormont said:

No. Because on the one hand, we have an orange: a sweeping statement made by you about accusations of racism in general. And on the other hand, we have a bunch of apples: the whole spectrum of accusations of racism, which will vary widely in how justified and well founded they are, whether they are general or specific, whether they apply to one incident or many, involve individuals or institutions, direct racism or indirect, egregious and open racism or more subtle expressions of bias, whether they are made genuinely or cynically, and on a whole range of other factors.

And for some reason, you want to draw a comparison between the former and the latter, as if it were not totally ridiculous to compare two completely different things (or one thing and a whole group of other things, to be strictly accurate). You want me to make a sweeping statement about accusations of racism to match yours, so that you can wave away the criticism as just as dumb as your original statement. That won't fly, though. Sorry.

Not really seeing why you would wonder this?

In fairness to me, the only thing you've provided to discredit my sweeping statement is indeed...because you say so.

Secondly, I admited that I have no way to prove my claim so I changed it to - A LOT of racism discussion. 

Which I certainly can prove and certainly does fly regardless of how much you like or dislike it.

 

 

Also you havent provided anything backing up your claim that my original statement is dumb so your proclamation there doesn't fly. Anything other than -because you say so- that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

In fairness to me, the only thing you've provided to discredit my sweeping statement is indeed...because you say so.

Dude, if you start a post with 'in fairness to me' people are not ever going to take you seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mormont said:

Dude, if you start a post with 'in fairness to me' people are not ever going to take you seriously.

What a sweeping statement that you have absolutely no way to back up. Well, well this claim of yours most certainly doesnt fly. If I was a little more petty I'd be tempted to call it a dumb statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

I really don't like the precedent of bullying countries because their private citizens do things you don't like without actually breaking any laws either though. Re: the hiding in the embassy - while his claim is that he's hiding from US charges, the legal mess he's currently in is with regards to Sweden where he is accused of actually breaking the law and is a different story. He should move his ass out of that embassy and face the music in Sweden where he'll probably be convicted of a crime that at this point I'm pretty confident he committed given what he's shown us of who he is. I'm specifically talking about the idea of the US scooping him up and serving time there without any conspiracy to cause the leaks.

 

3 hours ago, karaddin said:

Just have issues with "piss us off and we can get you".

That's fair, and again I have to point out my bias here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...