Miscellaneous News. - Page 47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bergermeister 

I saw around teh net that some Republicans are having a hissy fit (yeah, another one) about the timing of the news regarding Patreus.

 

Turns out the GOP's own Eric Cantor (House Majority Leader) knew of the situation way back in October.

 

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/11/us/petraeus-cia-resignation/

It appears to me that Cantor and Reichert acted entirely appropriately in not disseminating that information.

Yeah on second reading it looks OK.

Do you think this is a cover up for the Bengazi incident that happened a few months ago?
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvfox 

Do you think this is a cover up for the Bengazi incident that happened a few months ago?
 

CIA is anybody's guess.  The Republicans will try to make a huge fuss over it, recklessly (whether a cover-up or not), because they are desperate right now to divert attention from their own failings and desire to not take responsibility for losing the election (despite being the party of personal responsibility).

If something improper was going on with Libya, I hope it gets cleared up, but it needs to be done so that more lives are not put at risk; I fear that the GOP, in their zeal to divert attention from themselves and to make Obama look bad, will endanger more lives and operations. Their continuous negativity only hurts the position of the US on the world stage, a concept they can't comprehend.

Mittens' group last week had a foreign policy advisor sit down with Japan's NHK to relate Mittens' differences from Obama, despite polls showing Mittens had little chance of winning (which the Japanese were following).  The advisor pretty quickly laid out differences with Obama's administration which people were asking me about today.  However, their questions went more to the tune: why do the Republicans hate Obama and America so much that they would strive to hurt American foreign policy just to hurt Obama?  And: Where did the "united" go from the United States?  And: aren't many of Mittens' advisors the same people who started the Iraq war based on lies and led to more American deaths than the 9/11 attacks?  

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

Bloomberg Strikes Again: NYC Bans Food Donations To The Homeless

His new name "Banberg".

US to become less foreign energy dependent...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578115152144093088.html

Oooh!

That is a great law which to bad the U.S. should have and does not. To many old clunkers on the road which should be eliminated completely regarding gas guzzlers.Screwing up the environment completely.
 

'Government surveillance is on the rise,' says Google

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

'Government surveillance is on the rise,' says Google

Not surprising. As law enforcement agencies catch up with technology and as traditional communication methods continue to change we should probably expect to see the trend continue. Provided that they remain within the law, which they probably will have to when demanding data from companies like Google, then the only concern should be that of ensuring that we don't let the laws get too lax on this kind of thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry 

 

Not surprising. As law enforcement agencies catch up with technology and as traditional communication methods continue to change we should probably expect to see the trend continue. Provided that they remain within the law, which they probably will have to when demanding data from companies like Google, then the only concern should be that of ensuring that we don't let the laws get too lax on this kind of thing.

Do you see any problem with warrantless monitoring of electronic communications by the government?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazzguru 

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry 

 

Not surprising. As law enforcement agencies catch up with technology and as traditional communication methods continue to change we should probably expect to see the trend continue. Provided that they remain within the law, which they probably will have to when demanding data from companies like Google, then the only concern should be that of ensuring that we don't let the laws get too lax on this kind of thing.

 

Do you see any problem with warrantless monitoring of electronic communications by the government?

It really depends on what kind of monitoring you mean - targeted or untargeted. Broad keyword monitoring seems like an effective CT/LE measure, has had reasonable success I think, and is not particularly intrusive unless it catches you. Targeted, in the US, still depends on citizenship IIRC.

Personally, under a democratically elected government, I don't much care about surveillance, and I think that for all kinds of reasons one should regard communications as unsecure. You can always use encryption if you really care.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry 

 

It really depends on what kind of monitoring you mean - targeted or untargeted. Broad keyword monitoring seems like an effective CT/LE measure, has had reasonable success I think, and is not particularly intrusive unless it catches you. Targeted, in the US, still depends on citizenship IIRC.

 

Personally, under a democratically elected government, I don't much care about surveillance, and I think that for all kinds of reasons one should regard communications as unsecure. You can always use encryption if you really care.

Thanks for clarifying your position.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonton 

I know some of you may believe differently, but it's such a crying shame that Kucinich will lose his seat in January. Cabinet position, perhaps, or is Obama too conservative?

I think the term you're looking for is not conservative, but statist, or authoritarian.

Apparently, you can take down an entire city's LTE network for less than $700.

LTE technology was largely designed and implemented post-9/11. Government oversight at its finest?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonton 

Which describes what most people recognize as today's conservatives perfectly.

And also today's liberals/progressives.

Union over plays its hand, Hostess Brands shutting down. Oops.

People used to joke that Twinkies could survive a nuclear blaster or zombie attack. What they couldn't survive however was extended Obama policies and unions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trumptman 

People used to joke that Twinkies could survive a nuclear blaster or zombie attack. What they couldn't survive however was extended Obama policies and unions.

But can't Obama just bail them out or print more money or give a moving speech and make everything better?

Quote:

Originally Posted by trumptman 

People used to joke that Twinkies could survive a nuclear blaster or zombie attack. What they couldn't survive however was extended Obama policies and unions.

I guess The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union was not big enough (e.g., UAW) to warrant a taxpayer-funded bailout.

But now that this line has been crossed, perhaps the tax payers will want to buy the Hostess Brands at auction and run the company.

Florida man describes being shot by police Taser as he sprayed fire with garden hose

POTUS visits Myanmar.  American press pays little attention because War In Israel (WII) is so much more fun.

Wall Street Journal worries that he is taking victory lap for W's work; couldn't care less about Myanmar and its people.

- - - - -

Sharon's son says to level Gaza.  As for as I'm concerned, the US should withdraw all support for Israel over such a statement; every last dime.

I do not believe Bloomberg will due this.Where do you get your information from the Inquirer!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank777 

 

There has never been a country called Palestine in the entire history of this planet. SDW is right, it has never existed.

Erm... So what was the British Mandate for Palestine? 

and why then did the Jewish pro-zionist terrorists murder so many, British troops and innocent people, in attempt to achieve their aim of having their own space in the land that they themselves spent years calling Palestine?

The suggestion that Palestine never existed is bizarre, to suggest that it was once a region of Jordan is even more odd. Palestine, as an official state, once included the regions of what are now called Jordan and Israel. With jordan being created in 1946 and isreal 2 years later.

It does worry me that there seem to be people here that have demonstrated a higher than average IQ yet who are willing to allow accept whatever those with axes to grind would like them them to believe, without question. Denial that Palestine existed has worrying parallels with the denial that the holocaust took place.   

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry 

 

It really depends on what kind of monitoring you mean - targeted or untargeted. Broad keyword monitoring seems like an effective CT/LE measure, has had reasonable success I think, and is not particularly intrusive unless it catches you. Targeted, in the US, still depends on citizenship IIRC.

 

Personally, under a democratically elected government, I don't much care about surveillance, and I think that for all kinds of reasons one should regard communications as unsecure. You can always use encryption if you really care.

 Valid points but I believe that failure to provide an encryption key is an offence in most parts of the world.

BTW don't we already have Echelon or is that just a myth/catch-all term?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

 

 

So to sum up, because John Locke also wrote "Man has a right to life, liberty and property". Basically all Jefferson did was combine both of John Locke's quotes to come up with- "certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

 

 

Inalienable rights? Man made constructs or edicts passed down from some kind of deity? Personally I adhere to the principle that they are the carrots on the stick, held just in front of our snouts by the owners of the carrots whilst they grind us in to the ground.

Frankly, Liberty and Happiness, equally are subjective terms whose intent is to instill a false sense of autonomy.  99 per cent of us are, and will always be slightly better than, wage slaves. We live on a diet of aspirational dreams re-inforced by the media. Where has it got us? Most kids want to be singers, actually they just want to be famous for the sake of being famous.

For all of it's faults the system that we currently have at least affords us a generous degree of stability whilst retaining a veneer of meritocracy/fairplay.

If I wasn't so lazy/such a cynic I would revolt, can't be arsed though. Whoever weilds power will ensure that they put themselves at the top of the heap. And lo it is written....

Quote:

Originally Posted by hungover 

 Denial that Palestine existed has worrying parallels with the denial that the holocaust took place.   

There's never been a country called Palestine that has ever existed. It's known as a geographic region encompassing various territories, and it's also gone by other names throughout the course of history. It's also uncertain if there will ever be a country called Palestine in the future, judging by how things are going.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bergermeister 

POTUS visits Myanmar.  American press pays little attention because War In Israel (WII) is so much more fun.

 

Wall Street Journal worries that he is taking victory lap for W's work; couldn't care less about Myanmar and its people.

 

It's Burma, Myanmar is what supporters of the military dictatorship call it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazzguru 

 

But can't Obama just bail them out or print more money or give a moving speech and make everything better?

He can give them all free Obamaphones, so that they can call around and seek new employment opportunities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple ][ 

There's never been a country called Palestine that has ever existed. It's known as a geographic region encompassing various territories, and it's also gone by other names throughout the course of history. It's also uncertain if there will ever be a country called Palestine in the future, judging by how things are going.

I am not sure where you garner your knowledge from but you seem to have the wrong end of the stick.

In 1922 the League of Nations set the Mandate for Palestine, defining it's boundaries and referring to it hence forth as a country, albeit it under British rule until such a time that it could stand on its own feet.

As a former part of the Ottoman Empire the vast majority of the population were Muslim. Never-the-less the plan was to partition the country in time and to include a separate state for members of the Jewish faith. The oft touted suggestion that Israel exists because of the Allies’ guilt at ignoring their plight at the hands of the Nazis is largely a myth.

Ongoing fears of an Arab uprising, the continued terrorist attacks by Jewish Zionist organisations, lack of support in the UK for further deaths of British troops at the hands of Irgun following the end of WW2 and duplicity by the US resulted in the British announcing that they end the mandate and go home for a cup of tea.

The legal entity known as Palestine was eventually broken up into Jordan, Israel and the remainder became a grey zone, commonly referred to as Palestine but void of any (UN) legal status. In time a series of incidents resulted in the Israeli authorities to occupying some of these grey areas. Interestingly these are often legally referred to as the Occupied Palestine Territories.

Whilst the UN does not recognise the current state of Palestine, the majority of countries in the world seem to have no problem with allowing Palestinian embassies in their territories.

Harking back to my previous concerns about Palestinian/Holocaust denial- I guess that there will always be people that dislike others enough to falsify history to justify their abuse of them. With regard to this example the most disturbing element is the citing of earlier oppression at the hands of one evil to perform evil upon others. Unfortunately ManKind seldom learns from history.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hungover 

...In 1922 the League of Nations set the Mandate for Palestine, defining it's boundaries and referring to it hence forth as a country, albeit it under British rule until such a time that it could stand on its own feet...

 

...resulted in the British announcing that they end the mandate and go home for a cup of tea.

 

...The legal entity known as Palestine was eventually broken up into Jordan, Israel and the remainder became a grey zone, commonly referred to as Palestine but void of any (UN) legal status.

Your own post confirms that there has never been a country on this planet called Palestine.

Nobody claimed there had not been plans for one, but it never came into existence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank777 

Quote:

Originally Posted by hungover 

...In 1922 the League of Nations set the Mandate for Palestine, defining it's boundaries and referring to it hence forth as a country, albeit it under British rule until such a time that it could stand on its own feet...

 

...resulted in the British announcing that they end the mandate and go home for a cup of tea.

 

...The legal entity known as Palestine was eventually broken up into Jordan, Israel and the remainder became a grey zone, commonly referred to as Palestine but void of any (UN) legal status.

 

Your own post confirms that there has never been a country on this planet called Palestine.

 

Nobody claimed there had not been plans for one, but it never came into existence.

Is anyone arguing that the situation would be substantively different if there had, at any time, been a formally recognized Palestinian State? If not then this point is moot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry 

 

Is anyone arguing that the situation would be substantively different if there had, at any time, been a formally recognized Palestinian State?

No, I think it was pretty clear what the argument was about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank777 

 

Your own post confirms that there has never been a country on this planet called Palestine.

 

Nobody claimed there had not been plans for one, but it never came into existence.

 Sorry but did you miss the bit about the League of Nations defining Palestine as a country? How can the foremost authority defining a land mass as a country prove that it was never a country?

The fact that the Anglo-American Allied Powers/UN later changed their plans does not undo the fact that Palestine from the 20s to late 40's was officially recognised as a country by the fore-runner to the United Nations. The League of Nations was quite happy to refer to Palestine throughout this period as a country, not a region, not a country-in-waiting but a country.

Article 22 of the League of Nations

"Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone."