BBO Discussion Forums: Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 1109 Pages +
  • « First
  • 308
  • 309
  • 310
  • 311
  • 312
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped? Bernie Sanders wants to know who owns America?

#6181 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-26, 08:39

Would Trump listen to an adviser who did not agree with his cable-tv-Fox News-derived worldview?

Quote

According to an analysis of the Global Terrorism Database by Leif Wenar of King’s College London, more than 94 percent of deaths caused by Islamic terrorism since 2001 were perpetrated by the Islamic State, al-Qaeda and other Sunni jihadists. Iran is fighting those groups, not fueling them. Almost every terrorist attack in the West has had some connection to Saudi Arabia. Virtually none has been linked to Iran.


Yet Trump, on his recent trip, endlessly praised the Saudis and continuously demonized Iran. Very little in this world is that black and white, but simplification of that sort makes it easier for simple minds to choose a side to believe in, data be damned.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
2

#6182 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,613
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-May-26, 08:48

View PostWinstonm, on 2017-May-26, 08:39, said:

Yet Trump, on his recent trip, endlessly praised the Saudis and continuously demonized Iran. Very little in this world is that black and white, but simplification of that sort makes it easier for simple minds to choose a side to believe in, data be damned.

So he's finally starting to act "presidential". Remember the WMD that were the reason we attacked Iraq?

#6183 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-26, 09:09

Once when listening in on a domestic violence counseling training session, the trainer explained that, regardless of threats, the dangerous person in these situations is the one who thinks he has nothing left to lose. When watching the Trump rallies, and reading about the Trumpists motivations, that training session comes to mind as what appears to be happening is a channeling by Trump of the anger and frustration felt by the crowd.

It really makes sense in that context that when someone has lost his high-paying job and is scrambling to find any work or working 2-3 jobs to make 1/2 what they used to that the helplessness - that nothing left to lose mentality - would gravitate to someone who promises to bring back those jobs and punish those who caused the problems; all the while, the opposition candidate continues to ignore the same group.

The question I have is: how does it end? Will this group come to its senses or will we continue our decent into a de facto third world country separated by wealth inequality? I would think the former, as it is nearly impossible to hold onto rage indefinitely. When the fires cool, the way opens for reason to intrude.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
1

#6184 User is offline   jogs 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,316
  • Joined: 2011-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:student of the game

Posted 2017-May-26, 10:40

View PostCyberyeti, on 2017-May-24, 17:06, said:

You seem to have trouble with your figures, but why let facts get in the way of a racist rant.


Typical small mindedness from the left. That should open up the dialogue. Shame those who disagree with you. So you approve of Muslims living in the West practicing Sharia? They should be allowed human right abuses. Stoning those suspected of being gay is okay. Girls are owned by their fathers and when they marry they are owned by their husbands.
And you wonder why people lie to pollsters. Why people are afraid to report anything suspicious. Muslims are not the victims. Another bombing. All is forgiven by the tolerant left. Conservatives complain. The inflexible elitist progressive left demonizes conservatives with more name calling hate speech.
China will rule the world by 2050. China isn't dumb like the West, they won't open their borders.

Quote

Nobody who has any understanding of the figures or the geography would do anything other look at the figures for greater Manchester, it is just one large conurbation.

The figures for this are 232787/2682528 which is about half what you're claiming (8.7%) I don't know what figures you were using.


What does your fraction has to do with my statement on the city of Manchester? Few Muslims can afford to purchase homes in the expensive suburbs.
0

#6185 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2017-May-26, 10:51

View Postjogs, on 2017-May-26, 10:40, said:

Typical small mindedness from the left. That should open up the dialogue. Shame those who disagree with you. So you approve of Muslims living in the West practicing Sharia? They should be allowed human right abuses. Stoning those suspected of being gay is okay. Girls are owned by their fathers and when they marry they are owned by their husbands.


This is a straw man. No one wants these things.

Quote

And you wonder why people lie to pollsters. Why people are afraid to report anything suspicious. Muslims are not the victims. Another bombing. All is forgiven by the tolerant left. Conservatives complain. The inflexible elitist progressive left demonizes conservatives with more name calling hate speech.


So why is it Corbyn who warned against police cuts and who wants more police in the streets of Manchester and everywhere?

Quote


What does your fraction has to do with my statement on the city of Manchester? Few Muslims can afford to purchase homes in the expensive suburbs.


I guess you must be right because you live in Manchester, and I have been there just a couple of times. I am surprised though. In London Muslims are not a relatively poor group.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
1

#6186 User is offline   StevenG 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 629
  • Joined: 2009-July-10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bedford, England

Posted 2017-May-26, 11:10

View PostWinstonm, on 2017-May-26, 09:09, said:

It really makes sense in that context that when someone has lost his high-paying job and is scrambling to find any work or working 2-3 jobs to make 1/2 what they used to that the helplessness - that nothing left to lose mentality - would gravitate to someone who promises to bring back those jobs and punish those who caused the problems; all the while, the opposition candidate continues to ignore the same group.

The question I have is: how does it end? Will this group come to its senses ...

What do you mean by come to its senses? As you say, the opposition candidates are promising nothing for these people. Yes, one would hope they see through Trump in time. But they will only transfer their allegiance to another candidate who can promote a populist agenda. And since I don't see Donald Trump, for all his egotism, ignorance and incompetence, as actively malevolent, the next candidate might be much more dangerous. So-called progressives must DO something for these people, not just sit around feeling superior.
2

#6187 User is offline   RedSpawn 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 889
  • Joined: 2017-March-11

Posted 2017-May-26, 12:04

View PostWinstonm, on 2017-May-26, 09:09, said:

Once when listening in on a domestic violence counseling training session, the trainer explained that, regardless of threats, the dangerous person in these situations is the one who thinks he has nothing left to lose. When watching the Trump rallies, and reading about the Trumpists motivations, that training session comes to mind as what appears to be happening is a channeling by Trump of the anger and frustration felt by the crowd.

It really makes sense in that context that when someone has lost his high-paying job and is scrambling to find any work or working 2-3 jobs to make 1/2 what they used to that the helplessness - that nothing left to lose mentality - would gravitate to someone who promises to bring back those jobs and punish those who caused the problems; all the while, the opposition candidate continues to ignore the same group.


Agreed.

I want to make it clear, this is not an indictment of the Republican brand, but some things I have noticed.

I think George W. Bush on some level diluted the Republican brand as President of the United States.

Let us not forget that George Bush was elected into office in 2000 amid the "hanging Chad" controversy against Al Gore; so he won the Presidential seat with much national controversy over whom should receive the electoral votes for the hotly contested State of Florida. With the 09/11 terrorist attacks, Bush became a wartime President and directed the invasion of Afghanistan to depose the Taliban which had harbored Al-Qaeda and this effort was successful. As a result, he had few issues with being re-elected as President in 2004.

I think, however, Bush diluted the Republican brand particularly after 2004 because of the preemptive war strike on Iraq and the subsequent realization that there were no weapons of mass destruction. His entire pretext for war in Iraq was proven to be invalid. It was a huge intelligence failure and made the War on Terror seem like an exorbitant, extended propaganda campaign.

This is a very interesting article from CBS News about Bush's state of mind on Iraq:

http://www.cbsnews.c...to-invade-iraq/

Keep in mind also, that before the November 2008 election, our nation watched one of the biggest stock market crashes in October 2008.

https://www.thebalan...of-2008-3305535 ==> The list of events between September 2008 - December 2008 is somewhat chilling.

Granted, the housing market crash was the result of housing and banking/finance policies that both Democrat and Republican politicians passed or approved. However, the capital wealth evaporation and job destruction began to occur right before the November 2008 election and proved to be a bit much for the nation to digest. I honestly believe a lot of the electorate was disillusioned, financially compromised, and war-weary. They were on the verge of losing jobs or had lost jobs because of the housing bubble crash and decided to stay home, if they still had one. As a result, they did not vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin. And if they did vote amid this market chaos, they did the unthinkable and crossed party lines and voted for "Change" which was President's Obama's platform.

The link below discusses the Impact on U.S. Public Debt by President:

https://www.thebalan...of-2008-3305535

Quote

President Bush added the second-greatest amount to the [public] debt, at $5.849 trillion. But this was the fourth-largest percentage increase out of all the presidents. Bush increased the debt 101 percent from where it started on September 30, 2001, at $5.8 trillion. That's the end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget. Bush responded to the 9/11 attacks by launching the War on Terror. That drove military spending to record levels of $600-$800 billion a year. It included the Iraq War, which cost $807.5 billion.

President Bush also responded to the 2001 recession by passing EGTRRA and JGTRRA. The Bush tax cuts further reduced revenue. He approved a $700 billion bailout package for banks to combat the 2008 global financial crisis. Both Presidents Bush and Obama had to contend with higher mandatory spending for Social Security and Medicare.

The notion of Republican fiscal conservatism was a very hard sell in light of the public debt figures presented during Bush's administration. He diluted his party's brand.

But, I must be fair, and include President Obama's impact as well.

Quote

Barack Obama - The national debt grew the most dollar-wise during President Obama's two terms. He added $7.917 trillion, a 68 percent increase, in seven years. This was the fifth-largest increase percentage-wise. Obama's budgets included the economic stimulus package. It added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt in two years.

Obama's budget increased defense spending to between $700 billion and $800 billion a year. Federal income was down, thanks to lower tax receipts from the 2008 financial crisis. He also sponsored the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It was designed to reduce the debt by $143 billion over ten years. But these savings didn't show up until the later years.

So, over the course of sixteen years, two presidents both Republican and Democrat, increased our public debt by a total of $13.8 TRILLION! Is that the change we want to believe in? Our nation has to have a honest dialogue about how to stem/stop the public debt hemorrhaging as well. Trump also says he can address these financial concerns, but not with arithmetic that double-counts $2 trillion in his own budget.
0

#6188 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-26, 14:39

View PostStevenG, on 2017-May-26, 11:10, said:

What do you mean by come to its senses? As you say, the opposition candidates are promising nothing for these people. Yes, one would hope they see through Trump in time. But they will only transfer their allegiance to another candidate who can promote a populist agenda. And since I don't see Donald Trump, for all his egotism, ignorance and incompetence, as actively malevolent, the next candidate might be much more dangerous. So-called progressives must DO something for these people, not just sit around feeling superior.


By "come to its senses" I mean to realize that Donald Trump is not populist at all but is promoting an American version of Russia's oligarchy. We need an America first candidate, but one who genuinely realizes and believes that America means all of us, regardless of religion, color, or creed, and that working internationally to develop allies and promote international trade is in America's interest.

If we continue down this current path of tribalism, we will rend the garment of self-government and make it unwearable.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

#6189 User is offline   PassedOut 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,680
  • Joined: 2006-February-21
  • Location:Upper Michigan
  • Interests:Music, films, computer programming, politics, bridge

Posted 2017-May-26, 15:30

View PostWinstonm, on 2017-May-26, 14:39, said:

By "come to its senses" I mean to realize that Donald Trump is not populist at all but is promoting an American version of Russia's oligarchy.

It seems that way to me also. Trump's statements, actions, and history all point in that direction. I doubt that he'll be able to do it (I hope not anyway), but a lot of money from US billionaires has pushed the country in that direction too.
The growth of wisdom may be gauged exactly by the diminution of ill temper. — Friedrich Nietzsche
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
0

#6190 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,228
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2017-May-26, 16:22

On coming to one;s senses.
It seems as if the country is dividing into two groups, call then A and B. A thinks that B is composed of racists.B thinks that A is composed of naive elitists. Each thinks that the solution is for the other group to come to its senses.

I clam to be neither racist not elitst. I also claim to not be homophobic or any other kind of phobic, although I acknowledge some issues with acrophobia when i was young. An important part of this is that I have no intention of arguing with anyone about whether I am or am not racist, am or am not elitist. If someone wants ot call me a name I think this says more about them than it does about me.

I am not trying to set up some false equivalence. But I do think A and B are going at this wrong. I was driving to a club game yesterday, listening to 1-A. This is the replacement for Diane Rehm and despite my initial misgivings I have come to like it. Ibran X. Kendi was speaking of racism. Here is an example of the general approach:The prison population is disproportionately African-American. There are, and he used this approach for many issues, two possibilities. (1) This is due to defects of African-Americans as a race or (2) this is due to racism of white people. Since (1) is clearly unacceptable, it follows that (2) is true. Qed.

The conclusion? Unless I can reduce the number of African-Americans in prison, then clearly I am a racist.

I suggest another approach, and again I will start with incarceration. It costs a lot of money to run prisons. I have no idea of how much it costs to lock up a guy for thirty years, but I would settle for "a lot". Let's start with that. Everyone benefits if we can reduce the size of the prison population. The potential prisoner benefits in a direct manner, I benefit by not paying the bill. This seems to be a joining of interests. Of course crime is an issue, so we can't just open the doors. But my thought is that we simply push on the idea of doing what we can to reduce the number of cases where people need to be locked up. It might not be easy, but surely we could all work together tom make some improvements. Same with education, same with jobs. We all benefit if young people grow into responsible and capable adults. Focus first on this. I really think some of the racial problems would fade way.

Becky recently helped the whit girl next door prepare for a math exam, Becky and I have each worked in a tutoring project with African-Americans. But really neither of us spend a lot of time thinking about what we can do for others, neighbors or not. Neither of us will receive the humanitarian of the year award. But just about everyone can understand the benefits for us all of having most adults be self-supporting and law abiding. So concentrate on that, it should get broad support, minimize the divisive race issue.

I think this is right, but I also think I am dreaming.
Ken
0

#6191 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,519
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-May-26, 17:14

Ken, I admire your spirit, but I think you should open your eyes a little more to reality.

The large majority of non-violent drug offenders serving prison time are black. That's despite the fact that recreational drug use is pretty much equally common among all races. This means that the USA's drug enforcement system is racist (in the sense of having racist results). But it doesn't make any single human being racist, even if they are part of this system.

Now consider Jeff Sessions. There is a broad consensus (among conservatives and liberals) that in the US, most prison terms for non-violent offenders are too long. Here comes Jeff Sessions, and specifically asks his prosecutors to seek the maximal possible sentences. Combined with the reality described in the previous paragraph, that request will have racially disparate results.

Does that make Jeff Sessions a racist? No, he could just be cranky 71-year old law and order guy.

But now consider who Jeff Sessions is. He grew up in post-war Alabama, and lived there most of his life. He is literally named after a Confederate general. He has said plenty of racist things in the past - racist enough that his nomination for district court in 1986 didn't make it through the Senate.

Jeff Session was 56 when his home state struck language from the constitution that would prohibit interracial marriage. He was 60 and 68 when voters in his home state voted to keep school segregation language in the constitution. (*)

Sometimes, you have to allow for the possibility that the simplest possible explanation is the correct one.

(*) I should admit that this shorthand is a bit unfair to Alabama with regards to the 2012 referendum - there was quite a bit of opposition to that amendment that seemed to have good reasons.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
4

#6192 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-26, 21:59

We are now seeing why the Republican Party has been so subdued about criticizing Russia's interference in our election processes - they seem to have been complicit and benefited from the Russian hacking: From The Atlantic: (emphasis added)

Quote

The second remarkable thing that happened that day was the publication by The Wall Street Journal of a report detailing direct contacts between a Republican political operative and Russian hackers. The Florida-based Republican, Aaron Nevins, received and published Russian-hacked material—and in return, advised the hackers how to release their material to increase its damage to Democratic candidates. Nevins was not himself a high-ranking person in the Republican world. But the information Nevins obtained from Guccifer 2.0 was used by other Republican campaigns, including the national Republican congressional effort and Paul Ryan’s own super PAC. The earlier claim that Republicans were purely passive and unwitting beneficiaries of Russian espionage in the 2016 election has now been pierced. In at least one instance, the cooperation was active, conscious, and initiated on the American side, not the Russian: collusion, in a word.

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

#6193 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-26, 22:17

Had this for awhile but forgot about it - Rand Corporation report on how Russia goes about cyber attacks.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

#6194 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,228
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2017-May-27, 09:13

View Postcherdano, on 2017-May-26, 17:14, said:

Ken, I admire your spirit, but I think you should open your eyes a little more to reality.

The large majority of non-violent drug offenders serving prison time are black. That's despite the fact that recreational drug use is pretty much equally common among all races. This means that the USA's drug enforcement system is racist (in the sense of having racist results). But it doesn't make any single human being racist, even if they are part of this system.

Now consider Jeff Sessions. There is a broad consensus (among conservatives and liberals) that in the US, most prison terms for non-violent offenders are too long. Here comes Jeff Sessions, and specifically asks his prosecutors to seek the maximal possible sentences. Combined with the reality described in the previous paragraph, that request will have racially disparate results.

Does that make Jeff Sessions a racist? No, he could just be cranky 71-year old law and order guy.

But now consider who Jeff Sessions is. He grew up in post-war Alabama, and lived there most of his life. He is literally named after a Confederate general. He has said plenty of racist things in the past - racist enough that his nomination for district court in 1986 didn't make it through the Senate.

Jeff Session was 56 when his home state struck language from the constitution that would prohibit interracial marriage. He was 60 and 68 when voters in his home state voted to keep school segregation language in the constitution. (*)

Sometimes, you have to allow for the possibility that the simplest possible explanation is the correct one.

(*) I should admit that this shorthand is a bit unfair to Alabama with regards to the 2012 referendum - there was quite a bit of opposition to that amendment that seemed to have good reasons.


I recognize that I over-simplify. But I am actually trying to make a point. Give up on Sessions. Give up on Trump. They won't be changing. I see the issue differently. Right now we have a mess. Democracy is a mess by design, but right now is, I think, much worse than usual. I was watching Brooks/Shields on PBS last night and one of them approximately quoted someone else (yes, this is a quote of a quote, with all the risks) saying something like "We have reached a point where if a politician throws a reporter to the ground and punches him, people want to know which party the politician belongs to before they decide how they feel about this". I think that's a pretty accurate assessment of where we are. We must try to find things that we can cooperate on. This could come from seeing the benefit to everyone of good programs. With my Norwegian genes I could resent Swedes. I don't, but suppose I did. I could still agree that it is best if everyone, Swedes, Norwegians, and everyone else, receives a good education. My life would not get better if we all had to support a large number of incarcerated Swedes. So forget whether I am or am not a Swedophobe, and get going on education and opportunity for everyone. If we could focus on that, I believe progress could be made.

A recent PBS Newshour had a segment about testosterone levels and how it correlates with success as a CEO. Since CEOs are not always willing to give samples, they also discussed how facial structure correlates with testosterone levels. And so we get to facial structure as a predictor of success in the corporate structure, particularly the ratio of width to height of the face. I suppose there is some science to this and I suppose it will be used, but it made me a bit ill. I am not sure I see how this differs from racial correlations. I never had any interest in being a CEO. Maybe this means I have low testosterone. Or maybe it just didn't interest me. We are putting people into labeled boxes, and I don't like it. I am not planning on measuring the width and height of my face.

I repeat, I admit I am over-simplifying. But I also repeat that I think that there is something to what I am saying.

I am fine with having equal sentences for powdered and crack cocaine, and for meth and heroin and opioids and so on. I favor helping the individual user, I favor quite stiff penalties for the dealers. I don't need to know a thing about the race, culture, whatever of the people involved for me to hold this view.
Ken
0

#6195 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-27, 10:47

View Postkenberg, on 2017-May-27, 09:13, said:

I recognize that I over-simplify. But I am actually trying to make a point. Give up on Sessions. Give up on Trump. They won't be changing. I see the issue differently. Right now we have a mess. Democracy is a mess by design, but right now is, I think, much worse than usual. I was watching Brooks/Shields on PBS last night and one of them approximately quoted someone else (yes, this is a quote of a quote, with all the risks) saying something like "We have reached a point where if a politician throws a reporter to the ground and punches him, people want to know which party the politician belongs to before they decide how they feel about this". I think that's a pretty accurate assessment of where we are. We must try to find things that we can cooperate on. This could come from seeing the benefit to everyone of good programs. With my Norwegian genes I could resent Swedes. I don't, but suppose I did. I could still agree that it is best if everyone, Swedes, Norwegians, and everyone else, receives a good education. My life would not get better if we all had to support a large number of incarcerated Swedes. So forget whether I am or am not a Swedophobe, and get going on education and opportunity for everyone. If we could focus on that, I believe progress could be made.

A recent PBS Newshour had a segment about testosterone levels and how it correlates with success as a CEO. Since CEOs are not always willing to give samples, they also discussed how facial structure correlates with testosterone levels. And so we get to facial structure as a predictor of success in the corporate structure, particularly the ratio of width to height of the face. I suppose there is some science to this and I suppose it will be used, but it made me a bit ill. I am not sure I see how this differs from racial correlations. I never had any interest in being a CEO. Maybe this means I have low testosterone. Or maybe it just didn't interest me. We are putting people into labeled boxes, and I don't like it. I am not planning on measuring the width and height of my face.

I repeat, I admit I am over-simplifying. But I also repeat that I think that there is something to what I am saying.

I am fine with having equal sentences for powdered and crack cocaine, and for meth and heroin and opioids and so on. I favor helping the individual user, I favor quite stiff penalties for the dealers. I don't need to know a thing about the race, culture, whatever of the people involved for me to hold this view.


It appears Trump, et al, do not agree with your view on drugs: From WaPo: https://www.washingt...m=.3afac9d514ab

Quote

What’s the standard line on President Trump these days? That he’s an erratic creature of no fixed commitments and no stable policy objectives? Not so fast. In fact, Trump’s entire administration can be understood through the lens of his weird, consistent, unwavering adherence to a 1980s concept of the War on Drugs.

This adherence unifies his policy actions: not only the appointment of drug-war hard-liner Jeff Sessions as attorney general but also his approach to immigration and “the wall,” his calls for a revival of “stop and frisk” and “law and order” policies, key features of the Republican House health-care bill, the bromances with Rodrigo Duterte and Vladimir Putin, and even the initial proposal to defund the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

#6196 User is offline   RedSpawn 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 889
  • Joined: 2017-March-11

Posted 2017-May-27, 11:42

View PostWinstonm, on 2017-May-26, 22:17, said:

Had this for awhile but forgot about it - Rand Corporation report on how Russia goes about cyber attacks.


This is a very good article from the Rand Corporation.

You do realize, however, with respect to how to propagate propaganda, this could be the very same model for our government and media-industrial complex, right?

Quote

Distinctive Features of the Contemporary Model for Russian [American] Propaganda

1. High-volume and multi-channel
2. Rapid, continuous, and repetitive
3. Lacks commitment to objective reality
4. Lacks commitment to consistency.


  • We have moved from ABC, CBS, and NBC as the primary three networks for television news in the 1950's to a variety of television and cable channels and news platforms: ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, CNBC, MSNBC, FOX, C-SPAN, CNN, HLN(Headline News), Bloomberg Television, FOX Business cable channel, a seemingly endless stream of magazines as well as INTERNET websites to obtain content. Have you ever looked at the enormity of the magazine rack at a local Barnes & Noble?--just wow!)
  • Our news cycle has moved from multi-day in the 40's, to daily, now to a 24/7 news cycle a.k.a micro-news. This is basically a minute-by-minute update of news and the content is quite repetitive throughout the day. Some will even suggest that we have professional "bobble heads" that read teleprompters containing repetitious news selected by a television/cable news producer. Our news is so continuous that the term "BREAKING NEWS" has lost its celebrity status.
  • Back in the 1950's and even early 80's, news was news and editorials were editorials. Nowadays, there appears to be less of a journalistic distinction between news and editorials and the bias from media is getting progressively worse. Even the term "fake news" has entered the lexicon. Viewers/subscribers/vistors have to do the dirty work of identifying what glaring omissions an article contains to make sure they receive both sides of the story a.k.a. (HIS-STORY + HER-STORY = TOTAL STORY) or (OUR STORY + THEIR STORY = TOTAL STORY).
  • The amount of errors and omissions I have found in news media across all platforms, especially newspapers and internet websites is just astounding--especially since the internet boom. By increasing the frequency of news, we have compromised the overall quality and depth of content. I think the media-industrial complex has removed too many editors from the news department (due to downsizing and consolidation) and viewers/subscribers/visitors have become editors by default. Good grammar is sexy, but not when we become unpaid editors!

0

#6197 User is offline   RedSpawn 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 889
  • Joined: 2017-March-11

Posted 2017-May-27, 13:36

View PostZelandakh, on 2017-May-24, 07:52, said:


So you still believe that almost all security services across the Western world are involved in an enormous conspiracy theory to implicate the Russians in the elections of the USA and, to a lesser extent, France? No doubt that makes perfect sense in your fantasies; in the real world noone with half a brain considers Russian involvement in doubt. The unknown part is how large of an impact it had. Where there is little doubt is that the combination of the Russians together with the Comey effect were enough to swing the election.

All that is basically old news though. We have a result and it is not going to change because a foreign power got involved. On the other hand, if it were shown that there was collusion between one of the candidates and such a foreign power, well that is a different story. Another possible scenario is that the POTUS was impossibly compromised and therefore unable to discharge his responsibilities. That would be a different situation entirely. I assume you would not support the POTUS's position if either of these scenarios comes up?


I think we have to take a step back here.

It is very important that we have a healthy level of professional skepticism of any source from whom we receive information. And yes, that even includes members of the Western Intelligence services and law enforcement community.

COINTELPRO was under the Federal Bureau of Investigation but it gathered intelligence illegally, violated Constitutional rights, and was known for disseminating propaganda. See link: https://en.wikipedia...iki/COINTELPRO.

The huge intelligence failure regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was committed by 16 different members of the Western intelligence community and led to an extended, costly war campaign.

Edward Snowden revealed a mass surveillance program that again undermined the Constitutional rights of all American citizens, millions of whom have not committed crimes, and yet were the subject of mass electronic illegal searches and seizures. See https://en.wikipedia...Edward_Snowden.

Quote

The ongoing publication of leaked documents has revealed previously unknown details of a global surveillance apparatus run by the United States' NSA in close cooperation with three of its Five Eyes partners: Australia's ASD, the UK's GCHQ, and Canada's CSEC.

PRISM: a clandestine surveillance program under which the NSA collects user data from companies like Microsoft, Google, Apple, Yahoo, Facebook and YouTube.

On June 5, 2013, media reports documenting the existence and functions of classified surveillance programs and their scope began and continued throughout the entire year. The first program to be revealed was PRISM, which allows for court-approved direct access to Americans' Google and Yahoo accounts, reported from both The Washington Post and The Guardian published one hour apart. Barton Gellman of The Washington Post was the first journalist to report on Snowden's documents. He said the U.S. government urged him not to specify by name which companies were involved, but Gellman decided that to name them "would make it real to Americans." Reports also revealed details of Tempora, a British black-ops surveillance program run by the NSA's British partner, GCHQ. The initial reports included details about NSA call database, Boundless Informant, and of a secret court order requiring Verizon to hand the NSA millions of Americans' phone records daily, the surveillance of French citizens' phone and Internet records, and those of "high-profile individuals from the world of business or politics. XKeyscore, an analytical tool that allows for collection of "almost anything done on the internet," was described by The Guardian as a program that "shed light" on one of Snowden's most controversial statements: "I, sitting at my desk [could] wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email."

It was revealed that the NSA was harvesting millions of email and instant messaging contact lists, searching email content, tracking and mapping the location of cell phones, undermining attempts at encryption via Bullrun and that the agency was using cookies to "piggyback" on the same tools used by Internet advertisers "to pinpoint targets for government hacking and to bolster surveillance."The NSA was shown to be "secretly" tapping into Yahoo and Google data centers to collect information from "hundreds of millions" of account holders worldwide by tapping undersea cables using the MUSCULAR surveillance program.

The NSA, the CIA and GCHQ spied on users of Second Life, Xbox Live and World of Warcraft, and attempted to recruit would-be informants from the sites, according to documents revealed in December 2013. Leaked documents showed NSA agents also spied on their own "love interests," a practice NSA employees termed LOVEINT. The NSA was shown to be tracking the online sexual activity of people they termed "radicalizers" in order to discredit them. Following the revelation of "Black Pearl", a program targeting private networks, the NSA was accused of extending beyond its primary mission of national security. The agency's intelligence-gathering operations had targeted, among others, oil giant Petrobras, Brazil's largest company. The NSA and the GCHQ were also shown to be surveilling charities including UNICEF and Médecins du Monde, as well as allies such as European Commissioner Joaquín Almunia and the Israeli Prime Minister.

By October 2013, Snowden's disclosures had created tensions between the U.S. and some of its close allies after they revealed that the U.S. had spied on Brazil, France, Mexico, Britain, China, Germany, and Spain, as well as 35 world leaders, most notably German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who said "spying among friends" was "unacceptable" and compared the NSA with the Stasi. Leaked documents published by Der Spiegel in 2014 appeared to show that the NSA had targeted 122 "high ranking" leaders.

The NSA's top-secret "black budget," obtained from Snowden by The Washington Post, exposed the "successes and failures" of the 16 spy agencies comprising the U.S. intelligence community, and revealed that the NSA was paying U.S. private tech companies for "clandestine access" to their communications networks.The agencies were allotted $52 billion for the 2013 fiscal year.

An NSA mission statement titled "SIGINT Strategy 2012-2016" affirmed that the NSA had plans for continued expansion of surveillance activities. Their stated goal was to "dramatically increase mastery of the global network" and "acquire the capabilities to gather intelligence on anyone, anytime, anywhere." Leaked slides revealed in Greenwald's book No Place to Hide, released in May 2014, showed that the NSA's stated objective was to "Collect it All," "Process it All," "Exploit it All," "Partner it All," "Sniff it All" and "Know it All."

Snowden stated in a January 2014 interview with German television that the NSA does not limit its data collection to national security issues, accusing the agency of conducting industrial espionage. Using the example of German company Siemens, he stated, "If there's information at Siemens that's beneficial to US national interests—even if it doesn't have anything to do with national security—then they'll take that information nevertheless." In the wake of Snowden's revelations and in response to an inquiry from the Left Party, Germany's domestic security agency Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV) investigated and found no "concrete evidence" that the U.S. conducted economic or industrial espionage in Germany.

In February 2014, during testimony to the European Union, Snowden said of the remaining "undisclosed programs": "I will leave the public interest determinations as to which of these may be safely disclosed to responsible journalists in coordination with government stakeholders."

In March 2014, documents disclosed by Glenn Greenwald writing for The Intercept showed the NSA, in cooperation with the GCHQ, has plans to infect millions of computers with malware using a program called "Turbine." Revelations included information about "QUANTUMHAND," a program through which the NSA set up a fake Facebook server to intercept connections.

According to a report in The Washington Post in July 2014, relying on information furnished by Snowden, 90% of those placed under surveillance in the U.S. are ordinary Americans, and are not the intended targets. The newspaper said it had examined documents including emails, message texts, and online accounts, that support the claim.

In an August 2014 interview, Snowden for the first time disclosed a cyberwarfare program in the works, codenamed MonsterMind. The program would "automate the process of hunting for the beginnings of a foreign cyberattack". The software would constantly look for traffic patterns indicating known or suspected attacks. What sets MonsterMind apart was that it would add a "unique new capability: instead of simply detecting and killing the malware at the point of entry, MonsterMind would automatically fire back, with no human involvement". Snowden expressed concern that often initial attacks are routed through computers in innocent third countries. "These attacks can be spoofed. You could have someone sitting in China, for example, making it appear that one of these attacks is originating in Russia. And then we end up shooting back at a Russian hospital. What happens next?"
[bold and ital mine]


So, the ransomware attack in China, was it really executed by North Korea, or could it be Operation "Turbine" perpetrated by any partners of the Five Eyes global surveillance program as a false pretext to war or military action? Or could it have been a preemptive move to get bad actors like China to (1) curtail its ubiquitous software piracy (2) encourage its citizens and businesses to destroy bootleg copies of Microsoft Windows and (3) recommend that all users purchase legal software licenses with appropriate security patches to avoid future malware attacks. This would protect Western intellectual property rights and promote the U.S. economy. Snowden already said the NSA had attacks like these in the pipeline.

As citizens of a constitutional Republic, we must determine how much of our Constitutional freedoms we are willing to sacrifice to help our government provide more security. I am surprised that our nation doesn't appear to be extremely disturbed by the revelations of Edward Snowden's actions. It appears we have officially entered the era of "thought police".

Note: I am not suggesting Edward Snowden is a hero or a traitor. He just pulled back the curtain to reveal how Western intelligence services can abuse their powers and violate the Constitution if their powers remain hidden, unchecked and unquestioned. That is not what I call a conspiracy. It is just an inconvenient truth of our journey towards a surveillance state.
0

#6198 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-27, 13:40

View PostRedSpawn, on 2017-May-27, 11:42, said:

This is a very good article from the Rand Corporation.

You do realize, however, with respect to how to propagate propaganda, this could be the very same model for our government and media-industrial complex, right?



  • We have moved from ABC, CBS, and NBC as the primary three networks for television news in the 1950's to a variety of television and cable channels and news platforms: ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, CNBC, MSNBC, FOX, C-SPAN, CNN, HLN(Headline News), Bloomberg Television, FOX Business cable channel, a seemingly endless stream of magazines as well as INTERNET websites to obtain content. Have you ever looked at the enormity of the magazine rack at a local Barnes & Noble?--just wow!)
  • Our news cycle has moved from multi-day in the 40's, to daily, now to a 24/7 news cycle a.k.a micro-news. This is basically a minute-by-minute update of news and the content is quite repetitive throughout the day. Some will even suggest that we have professional "bobble heads" that read teleprompters containing repetitious news selected by a television/cable news producer. Our news is so continuous that the term "BREAKING NEWS" has lost its celebrity status.
  • Back in the 1950's and even early 80's, news was news and editorials were editorials. Nowadays, there appears to be less of a journalistic distinction between news and editorials and the bias from media is getting progressively worse. Even the term "fake news" has entered the lexicon. Viewers/subscribers/vistors have to do the dirty work of identifying what glaring omissions an article contains to make sure they receive both sides of the story a.k.a. (HIS-STORY + HER-STORY = TOTAL STORY) or (OUR STORY + THEIR STORY = TOTAL STORY).
  • The amount of errors and omissions I have found in news media across all platforms, especially newspapers and internet websites is just astounding--especially since the internet boom. By increasing the frequency of news, we have compromised the overall quality and depth of content. I think the media-industrial complex has removed too many editors from the news department (due to downsizing and consolidation) and viewers/subscribers/visitors have become editors by default. Good grammar is sexy, but not when we become unpaid editors!



It's hard not to talk about Reagan when the talk turns to media changes and media bias. Unbridled competition is not always a positive - and it is certainly not a positive when near-monopolies are given a free hand to broadcast opinion as news.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
1

#6199 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,613
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2017-May-27, 14:14

View PostStevenG, on 2017-May-26, 11:10, said:

What do you mean by come to its senses? As you say, the opposition candidates are promising nothing for these people.

"come to its senses" means that they realize that Trump is promising things he can't possibly deliver, and see that his actions have nothing to do with those promises. So he's no better than someone who doesn't make the promises in the first place.

He campaigned on making life better for the middle class, but his tax and health care plans are all about helping the rich.

#6200 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,288
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2017-May-27, 15:01

View PostRedSpawn, on 2017-May-27, 13:36, said:

I think we have to take a step back here.

It is very important that we have a healthy level of professional skepticism of any source from whom we receive information. And yes, that even includes members of the Western Intelligence services and law enforcement community.

COINTELPRO was under the Federal Bureau of Investigation but it gathered intelligence illegally, violated Constitutional rights, and was known for disseminating propaganda. See link: https://en.wikipedia...iki/COINTELPRO.

The huge intelligence failure regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was committed by 16 different members of the Western intelligence community and led to an extended, costly war campaign.

Edward Snowden revealed a mass surveillance program that again undermined the Constitutional rights of all American citizens, millions of whom have not committed crimes, and yet were the subject of mass electronic illegal searches and seizures. See https://en.wikipedia...Edward_Snowden.



So, the ransomware attack in China, was it really executed by North Korea, or could it be Operation "Turbine" perpetrated by any partners of the Five Eyes global surveillance program as a false pretext to war or military action? Or could it have been a preemptive move to get bad actors like China to (1) curtail its ubiquitous software piracy (2) encourage its citizens and businesses to destroy bootleg copies of Microsoft Windows and (3) recommend that all users purchase legal software licenses with appropriate security patches to avoid future malware attacks. This would protect Western intellectual property rights and promote the U.S. economy. Snowden already said the NSA had attacks like these in the pipeline.

As citizens of a constitutional Republic, we must determine how much of our Constitutional freedoms we are willing to sacrifice to help our government provide more security. I am surprised that our nation doesn't appear to be extremely disturbed by the revelations of Edward Snowden's actions. It appears we have officially entered the era of "thought police".

Note: I am not suggesting Edward Snowden is a hero or a traitor. He just pulled back the curtain to reveal how Western intelligence services can abuse their powers and violate the Constitution if their powers remain hidden, unchecked and unquestioned. That is not what I call a conspiracy. It is just an inconvenient truth of our journey towards a surveillance state.


I wish there were a simple solution but there is not, and by your posts I would think you agree with that assessment. The issue them becomes: can we reign in those to whom we grant great powers if they overstep - which they will, either by accident, over-protectiveness, or sinister intents. We must always have a set of checks and balances for each branch of government, including the intelligence agencies.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

  • 1109 Pages +
  • « First
  • 308
  • 309
  • 310
  • 311
  • 312
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

91 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 91 guests, 0 anonymous users