2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, SCRawl, Thanas, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12038
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby The Romulan Republic » 2017-01-12 12:30am

I'm not quite sure what your point is, to be honest.
"Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes" When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy." - Lincoln.

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28812
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Simon_Jester » 2017-01-12 08:00am

The Romulan Republic wrote:I think most people would agree that defending ones' nation from aggression falls under "use of violence in self-defence", not "ideological violence". Though I'm sure some people would argue the point, because their's someone who will argue anything.
That's because the idea of nation-states is a dominant ideology, one that most of the planet has agreed to respect.

I'm not even saying it's wrong. What I'm saying is that it's a meme. Nations are abstractions, they're things that people decided to believe in. When you look at the Earth from space, as a rule, you famously don't see the national borders. Because they aren't physically there. They exist in our minds, and have consequences in our minds. Protecting the independence and sovereignty of your 'nation' is an idea people have, it's not automatically the same as protecting your own life, or even the lives of other people.

That doesn't make it wrong- but the point is, it does make it an idea. And if we denigrate the notion of fighting over ideas, it's pretty easy to take that and turn it into denigrating the notion of fighting over sovereignty.

Because there will be ideologically motivated governments. Does it count as "terrorism" to defend your existing communist government against a force that doesn't want to kill your people but does want to abolish communism?

And there will be ideologically motivated movements. Does it count as "terorrism" if a foreign army invades to support the local government, which is trying to suppress your political movement and failing, and you fight the foreign army?

I would argue that it simply does not count as "terrorism" to fight an army at all, by any means. If an army can be terrorized through sporadic acts of small or medium-scale violence, it's a lousy excuse for an army.

Similarly, acts of violence by the state are not "terrorism," not because the state is somehow immune to being accused of evils, but because there are other, even worse words for what to call it when the state starts terrorizing people.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 12:01pm

Simon_Jester wrote:
Flagg wrote:There's a difference? I mean was Ghaddaffi a terrorist? He only ordered the terrorist bombing of a 747. Does having control of a government somehow make one more legitimate?
No, it doesn't make it legitimate, it changes the character of the act. An act of war is different than an act of terrorism, not better. Edwin Starr pretty much nailed this one.

I mean if Osama Bin Laden had been king of Afghanistan would 9/11 be less of a terrorist attack?
It would be an act of war. And if you think that's somehow 'less bad' than terrorism, it's because living in turn-of-the-millenium America has skewed your values. War is fucking horrible.

People who deliberately commit unnecessary acts of war are not better than terrorists. Every decent person should want to find a way to avoid wars, just like every sane driver tries to avoid car accidents. Even if they fail to do so because of some other factor.

The thing is, terrorism provides a means for people who are too fucked up and crazy to get control of a state for themselves to do the horrible things that war does to people. Terrorism isn't a super-illegitimate form of war; terrorism is what happens when war attracts copycat offenders. It's the hipsters picking up on stuff that Attila the Hun or whoever was doing before it was cool.

The fact is that terrorism is a tactic used by state and non-state actors. The distinction is meaningless. Firebombing Japan was just as much an act of terror as pissed off muslims flying planes into buildings.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 12:02pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Flagg wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:I was referencing non-state groups, because we're talking about terrorists and not about tyrants.

There's a difference? I mean was Ghaddaffi a terrorist? He only ordered the terrorist bombing of a 747. Does having control of a government somehow make one more legitimate? I mean if Osama Bin Laden had been king of Afghanistan would 9/11 be less of a terrorist attack?


No, at that point it is a war crime. Terrorists are non-state actors who target civilian populations with the goal of influencing the policies of a state.

Is it a war crime when no one is held accountable? Or do war crimes only matter if it's a small country with no nukes?
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11233
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Elheru Aran » 2017-01-12 12:05pm

Flagg wrote:Is it a war crime when no one is held accountable? Or do war crimes only matter if it's a small country with no nukes?


Even if you don't know who specifically did it, if it happened in the context of a war or under the auspices of a government, it's still a war crime. The only question is who did it.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 01:15pm

Elheru Aran wrote:
Flagg wrote:Is it a war crime when no one is held accountable? Or do war crimes only matter if it's a small country with no nukes?


Even if you don't know who specifically did it, if it happened in the context of a war or under the auspices of a government, it's still a war crime. The only question is who did it.

Oh I agree. But the US has been committing serious war crimes since long before 9/11 but... And the war crime would basically just be state sponsored terrorism.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11233
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Elheru Aran » 2017-01-12 01:17pm

The problem there is that the US tends to defend its war criminals or, on rare occasion, clean up its own house. 'War crime' tends to be addressed on an international stage.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28812
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Simon_Jester » 2017-01-12 02:35pm

Flagg wrote:Is it a war crime when no one is held accountable? Or do war crimes only matter if it's a small country with no nukes?
Would you ask this question about crimes committed by private individuals?

Flagg wrote:The fact is that terrorism is a tactic used by state and non-state actors. The distinction is meaningless. Firebombing Japan was just as much an act of terror as pissed off muslims flying planes into buildings.
Just to be clear, are you claiming that "terrorism" means "any act which causes terror?"

I'm not sure you're speaking the same language as me anymore.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12038
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby The Romulan Republic » 2017-01-12 03:00pm

Getting back to the election itself, or rather the Russian interference in it (and the Trump campaign's possible complicity), their have been substantial developments:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... a-contacts

Senator John McCain passed documents to the FBI director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow and that Russian intelligence had personally compromising material on the president-elect himself.

The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a series of reports on Trump’s relationship with Moscow. They were drawn up by a former western counter-intelligence official, now working as a private consultant. BuzzFeed on Tuesday published the documents, which it said were “unverified and potentially unverifiable”.


What we know – and what's true – about the Trump-Russia dossier
Read more
The Guardian has not been able to confirm the veracity of the documents’ contents, and the Trump team has consistently denied any hidden contacts with the Russian government.

A spokesman for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, on Wednesday denied Russia has collected compromising information on Trump and dismissed news reports as a “complete fabrication and utter nonsense”. Dmitry Peskov insisted that the Kremlin “does not engage in collecting compromising material”.

Trump’s transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but late on Tuesday, Trump tweeted: “FAKE NEWS – A TOTAL POLITICAL WITCH HUNT!” He made no direct reference to the allegations.

An official in the US administration who spoke to the Guardian described the source who wrote the intelligence report as consistently reliable, meticulous and well-informed, with a reputation for having extensive Russian contacts.

Some of the reports – which are dated from 20 June to 20 October last year – also proved to be prescient, predicting events that happened after they were sent.

One report, dated June 2016, claims that the Kremlin has been cultivating, supporting and assisting Trump for at least five years, with the aim of encouraging “splits and divisions in western alliance”.


Play VideoPlay
Current Time 0:00
/
Duration Time 2:57
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
FullscreenMute
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Donald Trump calls the unverified documents ‘fake news’ leaked by ‘sick people’ during his first press conference as President-elect
It claims that Trump had declined “various sweetener real estate deals offered him in Russia” especially in developments linked to the 2018 World Cup finals but that “he and his inner circle have accepted a regular flow of intelligence from the Kremlin, including on his Democratic and other political rivals.”

Most explosively, the report alleges: “FSB has compromised Trump through his activities in Moscow sufficiently to be able to blackmail him.” The president-elect has not responded to the allegations.


How the Trump dossier came to light: secret sources, a retired spy and John McCain
Read more
CNN reported on Tuesday that the FBI was still investigating the credibility of the documents but added that the intelligence chiefs had included a summary of the material in a secret briefing on Russian interference in the election delivered last week to Barack Obama and Donald Trump.

The emergence of the documents is potentially explosive, 10 days before Trump’s inauguration and on the eve of his first planned press conference since July last year.

Despite glowing references from US and foreign officials who have worked with the source, there are some errors in the reports. One describes the Moscow suburb of Barvikha as “reserved for the residences of the top leadership and their close associates”, but although it is a very expensive neighbourhood, there are no restrictions on who can own property there. The document also misspells the name of a Russian banking corporation.

Advertisement


The FBI does not normally make any comment on ongoing counter-intelligence investigations but was under increasing pressure from Democrats and some Republicans to act before the inauguration, particularly because of Comey’s announcement of a continuing investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server 11 days before the election, which many of her supporters believe cost her the presidency.

The reports were initially commissioned as opposition research during the presidential campaign, but its author was sufficiently alarmed by what he discovered to send a copy to the FBI. It is unclear who within the organisation they reached and what action the bureau took. The former Democratic Senate leader, Harry Reid, has lambasted Comey for publicising investigations into Hillary Clinton’s private server, while allegedly sitting on “explosive” material on Trump’s ties to Russia.

Another Democratic senator, Ron Wyden, questioned Comey insistently at a Senate intelligence committee hearing on Tuesday on whether the FBI was pursuing leads on Trump campaign contacts with Russia.

“Has the FBI investigated these reported relationships?” Wyden asked.

Comey replied: “I would never comment on investigations … in a public forum.

The Guardian can confirm that the documents reached the top of the FBI by December. Senator John McCain, who was informed about the existence of the documents separately by an intermediary from a western allied state, dispatched an emissary overseas to meet the source and then decided to present the material to Comey in a one-on-one meeting on 9 December, according to a source aware of the meeting. The documents, which were first reported on last year by Mother Jones, are also in the hands of officials in the White House.


James Comey refuses to tell Senate if FBI is investigating Trump-Russia links
Read more
McCain is not thought to have made a judgment on the reliability of the documents but was sufficiently impressed by the source’s credentials to feel obliged to pass them to the FBI.

The Senate armed services committee, which Senator McCain chairs, launched an inquiry last week into Russian cyber-attacks during the election.

McCain was reluctant to get involved, according to a colleague, for fear the issue would be dismissed as a personal grudge against Trump. He pushed instead for the creation of a special Senate committee to look into connections between campaign staff and Moscow, but the proposal was blocked by the Republican leadership.

Advertisement

McCain told the NBC programme Meet the Press on Sunday: “I would like to see a select committee. Apparently that is not in agreement by our leadership. So we will move forward with the armed services committee and I’m sure foreign relations and intelligence committee will as well.”

But the senator added: “It is possible if enough information comes out, that that decision could be reversed. I still think it’s the best way to attack the issue.”

Asked on the same programme on whether an investigation was ongoing into campaign links to Moscow, Senator Lindsey Graham, another conservative Republican said: “I believe that it’s happening.”

According to the report passed to Comey, Russian intelligence allegedly gathered compromising material during Trump’s stay in Moscow in November 2013, when he was in the city to host the Miss Universe pageant.

Another report, dated 19 July last year said that Carter Page, a businessman named by Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers, had held a secret meeting that month with Igor Sechin, head of the Rosneft state-owned oil company and a long-serving lieutenant of Vladimir Putin. Page also allegedly met Igor Divyekin, an internal affairs official with a background in intelligence, who is said to have warned Page that Moscow had “kompromat” (compromising material) on Trump.

Two months later, allegations of Page’s meetings surfaced in the US media, attributed to intelligence sources, along with reports that he had been under FBI scrutiny.

Page, a vociferous supporter of the Kremlin line, was in Moscow in July to make a speech decrying western policy towards Russia. At the time he declined to say whether he had been in contact with Russian officials, but in September he rejected the reports as “garbage”.

The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. The Fisa court turned down the application asking FBI counter-intelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October, but that has not been confirmed, and it is not clear whether any warrant led to a full investigation.

A month after Trump’s surprise election victory, Page was back in Moscow saying he was meeting with “business leaders and thought leaders”, dismissing the FBI investigation as a “witch-hunt” and suggesting the Russian hacking of the Democratic Party alleged by US intelligence agencies, could be a false flag operation to incriminate Moscow.

Another of the reports compiled by the former western counter-intelligence official in July said that members of Trump’s team, which was led by campaign manager Paul Manafort (a former consultant for pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine), had knowledge of the DNC hacking operation, and in return “had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue and to raise US/Nato defence commitments in the Baltics and Eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine”.

A few days later, Trump raised the possibility that his administration might recognise Russia’s annexation of Crimea and openly called on Moscow to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails.

In August, officials from the Trump campaign intervened in the drafting of the Republican party platform, specifically to remove a call for lethal assistance to Ukraine for its battle against Moscow-backed eastern rebels.


Trump campaign denies report of Trump Organization tie to Russian bank
Read more
Manafort stepped down in August as campaign manager and the campaign steadily distanced itself from Page. However, Trump’s praise of Putin and defence of Moscow’s actions in Ukraine and Syria remained one of the few constants in his campaign talking points.

Manafort has denied secret links with Moscow calling the allegation “an outrageous smear being driven by Harry Reid and the Clinton campaign”.

Since then, Trump has consistently cast doubt on Russian culpability for hacking the Democratic National Committee, defying a consensus of 17 national intelligence agencies. After Obama deported 35 Russian diplomats in retaliation for Moscow’s intervention, Trump praised Putin for not carrying out tit-for-tat deportations of US diplomats. “I always knew he was very smart,” he tweeted.

An FBI spokesman declined to comment after the CNN report.


And on the personal background and credibility of a key source in this case:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... ier-author

His denials – at least some of them – were emphatic, even by the standards that Donald Trump has come to be judged by. The dossier, he said, was a confection of lies; he compared it to Nazi propaganda; it was fake news spread by sick people.

At his press briefing on Wednesday, the president-elect dared the world’s media to scrutinise the 35 pages of claims, before throwing down a challenge – where’s the proof? Nobody had any. Case closed.

But in the rush to trample all over the dossier and its contents, one key question remained. Why had America’s intelligence agencies felt it necessary to provide a compendium of the claims to Barack Obama and Trump himself?

And the answer to that lies in the credibility of its apparent author, the ex-MI6 officer Christopher Steele the quality of the sources he has and the quality of the people prepared to vouch for him.

Christopher Steele.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Christopher Steele. Photograph: The Sun
In these respects, the 53-year-old was in credit.

On Thursday night, as the former spy was in hiding, having fled his home in the south-east of England, former colleagues rallied to defend him. One described him as “very credible” – a sober, cautious and meticulous professional with a formidable record.

The former Foreign Office official who has known Steele for 25 years and considers him a friend said: “The idea his work is fake or a cowboy operation is false, completely untrue. Chris is an experienced and highly regarded professional. He’s not the sort of person who will simply pass on gossip.”

Advertisement


The official added: “If he puts something in a report, he believes there’s sufficient credibility in it for it to be worth considering. Chris is a very straight guy. He could not have survived in the job he was in if he had been prone to flights of fancy or doing things in an ill-considered way.”

That is the way the CIA and the FBI, not to mention the British government, regarded him, too. It’s not hard to see why.

A Cambridge graduate, Steele was one of the more eminent Russia specialists for the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6). The Guardian understands he focused on Soviet affairs after joining the agency, and spent two years living in Moscow in the early 1990s.

This was a period when Russia, and the breakup of the eastern bloc, was still the prime focus for Britain’s intelligence agencies and a successful spell in the region was a good way to get on.

By all accounts, that’s exactly what Steele did. And his interest in Russia did not diminish as he continued to rise up the ranks, a friend and contemporary of Alex Younger – now head of MI6.

Journalists outside the London HQ of Orbis Business Intelligence.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Journalists outside the London HQ of Orbis Business Intelligence. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images
Over a career that spanned more than 20 years Steele performed a series of roles, but always appeared to be drawn back to Russia; he was, sources say, head of MI6’s Russia desk. When the agency was plunged into panic over the poisoning of its agent Alexander Litvinenko in 2006, the then chief, Sir John Scarlett, needed a trusted senior officer to plot a way through the minefield ahead – so he turned to Steele.

It was Steele, sources say, who correctly and quickly realised Litvinenko’s death was a Russian state “hit”.

As good as he was, Steele was unlikely to get the top MI6 job, perhaps because his specialisms were not a priority in that period – Russian espionage was taking a back seat to Islamic terrorist and non-state threats.

And, of course, there is money to be made in the private sector – lots of it, particularly in the past two years. He decided to quit the service in 2009.


What we know – and what's true – about the Trump-Russia dossier
Read more
As the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, exerted influence in all kinds of spheres, so Steele’s background made him hot property indeed. Though he could not travel to Russia, he appears to have kept up his contacts and made new ones, using old-school techniques: going out, meeting people, shaking hands, making friends – and paying for information.

With his business partner Chris Burrows, he set up the London-based company Orbis Business Intelligence, which was busy and expanding. Their operation would have been a good choice for anyone trying to gather intelligence about Russia and Trump.

It is unlikely that Steele would have had direct contact with the unnamed Kremlin officials who allegedly gave sensitive information on the president-elect. In fact, it’s believed the former spy hasn’t been able to visit Russia for more than 20 years.

Rather, Steele would have tapped up his network of sources deep inside the country, some of them dating from his time there and others cultivated later, British officials suggested.

In turn, these individuals will have had sources of their own. Steele would likely have subcontracted some of his Trump investigation to trusted intermediaries in Moscow, who will have reported back to him via secure channels.

Analysis Fictional or not, the Trump dossier affair is another win for Putin
Even if Moscow is not involved, the US has been weakened and its new leader compromised before he even takes power
Read more
This method of intelligence collection may explain the odd language anomaly in the Trump dossier that emerged into the public eye late on Tuesday. In a September briefing note, Steele mentions the Alpha-Group, a reference to the consortium headed by the powerful oligarch Mikhail Fridman. The more usual English spelling is Alfa.

Almost certainly, a native Russian speaker wrote the original material, correctly transliterating the Russian “f” as “ph”. It was Steele’s job to collate, evaluate and verify this material before passing it to his American client Fusion GPS, a Washington-based political research firm.

The company had been hired originally by one of Trump’s early Republican opponents before the contract was taken up by senior Democrats.

The Foreign Office official who spoke to the Guardian on Thursday acknowledged that the Steele dossier was not perfect. But he pointed out that intelligence reports always came with “gradations of veracity” and included phrases such as “a high degree of probability”. “You aren’t dealing with a binary world where you can say this is true and this isn’t,” the official said.

He added: “The strongest reason for giving this report credence is that intelligence professionals in the US take it seriously. They were sufficiently persuaded by the author’s track record to find the contents worth passing to the president and president-elect.”


Play VideoPlay
Current Time 0:00
/
Duration Time 2:55
Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
FullscreenMute
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Trump attacks media and intelligence community in press conference
The CIA and FBI will have taken various factors into consideration before deciding it had credibility. They include Trump’s public comments during the campaign, when he urged Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails. The agencies may also have classified intercept material provided by the National Security Agency and Britain’s GCHQ.

Advertisement


They must, equally, have considered whether some of the claims in the report might have been part of an elaborate Russian disinformation exercise. “This is unlikely. The dossier is multi-dimensional, involving many different people, and many moving parts,” the official suggested.

Steele’s personal views on Russia are unlikely to be very different from those of his former employers. Or from those of a former UK ambassador to Moscow, who is understood to have passed the dossier to the Republican senator John McCain, who in turn passed it to the FBI.

MI6 has been privately warning that Putin, unchallenged by the west, has grown in confidence and, of course, that the Kremlin has targeted Trump. It would be odd if it hadn’t. The consensus among British securocrats is that “Putin is a wolf … and he preys on the weakest sheep.”

But intelligence is not evidence and Steele would have known, better than anyone, that the information he was gathering was not fact and could be wrong. In the smoke and mirrors world of counter-espionage, there are few certainties.

Those caveats do not appear on the documents – but they are given by Steele as a warning to prospective new clients.


Donald Trump's truce with spy agencies breaks down over Russia dossier
Read more
Whether he could have imagined that a summary of his work would be used in this way is a moot point; Steele did not go to ground in the weeks before Christmas as US media outlets tried to stand up some of the claims against Trump. He was in London, thinking about where to take Orbis next, eating his favourite tapas and pottering around Victoria, home to his newly refurbished office.

From Moscow’s perspective, the report’s publication can hardly be counted a success. As a former KGB agent, Putin understands the first rule of intelligence: that special operations should remain secret. “In the world in which Putin operates, if people can see the strings you’ve failed,” the Foreign Office official said. “The Russians will be asking: ‘How the hell did it get out?’”

The spotlight is certainly not something Steele was looking for. He is mainly distrustful of the media – he chooses who to speak to, having been let down, so he has confided to friends, by reporters working for a Sunday newspaper.

After a career in MI6, anonymity is something he has prized. He once asked a journalist if he had ever heard of him. The reporter’s reply was a decisive: “No.” Steele was relieved. “That’s the way I like it.”

Now that his cover has been blown, his next steps are uncertain. The fact that Steele is a British citizen, and an outed former MI6 officer, makes him relatively secure from any act of Russian revenge. At the moment, the situation may look bleak for Steele. But things can change.

“This will eventually blow over,” Steele’s friend said. “What you are left with is a effective marketing campaign. He’s a very sober guy but he also has a sense of humour.”


Make of that what you will.
"Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes" When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy." - Lincoln.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1499
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby FireNexus » 2017-01-12 03:33pm

There's already a thread about the Russian thing. Is this duplicative?
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 03:35pm

Simon_Jester wrote:
Flagg wrote:Is it a war crime when no one is held accountable? Or do war crimes only matter if it's a small country with no nukes?
Would you ask this question about crimes committed by private individuals?

If the military arrested them and subjected them to torture? Yeah, I hope everyone would.

Flagg wrote:The fact is that terrorism is a tactic used by state and non-state actors. The distinction is meaningless. Firebombing Japan was just as much an act of terror as pissed off muslims flying planes into buildings.
Just to be clear, are you claiming that "terrorism" means "any act which causes terror?"

I'm not sure you're speaking the same language as me anymore.

Terrorism is an act done in order to achieve a political goal. Don't you think subjecting civilians to firebombing in an effort to achieve the political goal of getting their government to capitulate in armed conflict is terrorism?
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28812
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Simon_Jester » 2017-01-12 03:43pm

Flagg wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:
Flagg wrote:Is it a war crime when no one is held accountable? Or do war crimes only matter if it's a small country with no nukes?
Would you ask this question about crimes committed by private individuals?
If the military arrested them and subjected them to torture? Yeah, I hope everyone would.
No, you misunderstand.

My point is, obviously an act is still a crime when committed by someone who will be hard to punish for the crime. Why would we need to ask?

Just to be clear, are you claiming that "terrorism" means "any act which causes terror?"
I'm not sure you're speaking the same language as me anymore.
Terrorism is an act done in order to achieve a political goal. Don't you think subjecting civilians to firebombing in an effort to achieve the political goal of getting their government to capitulate in armed conflict is terrorism?
I think it's a wartime atrocity, which is just as bad or maybe even worse depending on the details.

Also, you only partially answered my question. Let me repeat with a bit of modification.

Are you claiming that "terrorism" means "any act which causes terror, with a political goal?"
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12038
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby The Romulan Republic » 2017-01-12 03:46pm

FireNexus wrote:There's already a thread about the Russian thing. Is this duplicative?


Well, I only posted it here, and its certainly relevant to the topic of this thread- probably more so than the tangent on the definition of terrorism. To my knowledge, no one has posted on these specific developments elsewhere, though I suppose its possible that I missed it.
"Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes" When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy." - Lincoln.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 04:37pm

Simon_Jester wrote:
Flagg wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:Would you ask this question about crimes committed by private individuals?
If the military arrested them and subjected them to torture? Yeah, I hope everyone would.
No, you misunderstand.

My point is, obviously an act is still a crime when committed by someone who will be hard to punish for the crime. Why would we need to ask?

Just to be clear, are you claiming that "terrorism" means "any act which causes terror?"
I'm not sure you're speaking the same language as me anymore.
Terrorism is an act done in order to achieve a political goal. Don't you think subjecting civilians to firebombing in an effort to achieve the political goal of getting their government to capitulate in armed conflict is terrorism?
I think it's a wartime atrocity, which is just as bad or maybe even worse depending on the details.

It's worse because no "terrorist attack" comes close to the sheer amount of death dealt like in Iraq.

Also, you only partially answered my question. Let me repeat with a bit of modification.

Are you claiming that "terrorism" means "any act which causes terror, with a political goal?"

I generally go by the dictionary definition:

Definition of terrorism
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Sorry, Merriam Webster doesn't want to let me copy the URL.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1499
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby FireNexus » 2017-01-12 05:48pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
FireNexus wrote:There's already a thread about the Russian thing. Is this duplicative?


Well, I only posted it here, and its certainly relevant to the topic of this thread- probably more so than the tangent on the definition of terrorism. To my knowledge, no one has posted on these specific developments elsewhere, though I suppose its possible that I missed it.


I was referring to this thread:


viewtopic.php?f=22&t=165969
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 06:18pm

Apparently a CNN reporter is being blacklisted from attending El Douche's press conferences for actually asking meaningful questions. I fully expect CNN to bend over and spread their cheeks.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 699
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Khaat » 2017-01-12 06:23pm

I hope the opposite: that everyone else asks real questions and gets blacklisted, too.

I'd love for the press corps to stand together and leave Trump to make all announcements for his regime through Twitter. Then for Twitter to terminate his account.
"Just because you're the captain doesn't mean you can order me to... oh, right. Fuck, it does." - Krep, Spacetrawler

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1499
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby FireNexus » 2017-01-12 06:35pm

Except we live in a capitalist society. If being a piece of shit puffer to the president will get clicks or eyeballs, somebody will fill that niche.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
Joun_Lord
Jedi Master
Posts: 1153
Joined: 2014-09-27 01:40am
Location: West by Golly Virginia

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Joun_Lord » 2017-01-12 06:51pm

Khaat wrote:I hope the opposite: that everyone else asks real questions and gets blacklisted, too.

I'd love for the press corps to stand together and leave Trump to make all announcements for his regime through Twitter. Then for Twitter to terminate his account.


Do you really what El Doucho to make all his crazy proclamations behind closed doors? I think having a light shined on him might help prevent him from doing something super crazy. I want him to have more press, more light shined on him. Why I think its stupid people are making shit up about him, the fucker does and says crazy shit already and connecting him to made up shit means people in the future might not believe when he actually does something.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 07:00pm

Khaat wrote:I hope the opposite: that everyone else asks real questions and gets blacklisted, too.

I'd love for the press corps to stand together and leave Trump to make all announcements for his regime through Twitter. Then for Twitter to terminate his account.

Won't happen, unfortunately. It's all about access and anyone who threatens that access gets shitcanned.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 699
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Khaat » 2017-01-12 07:01pm

If the "light shed on him" only publishes his rainbow-shooting-unicorn-ass? Yes, I want him ignored by those members of the press. I want those members of the press ignored.

Let his own loose lips sink his own ships. I don't need professional shit-polishers ignoring the "hard questions" so they can stay in his make-believe fairy-land.
"Just because you're the captain doesn't mean you can order me to... oh, right. Fuck, it does." - Krep, Spacetrawler

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28812
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Simon_Jester » 2017-01-12 07:41pm

If any administration's sheer craziness can break the "it's all about access" rule, THEN it would be the Trump administration.

If. Then.

Because ultimately, having 'access' to a train wreck is only so valuable, for so long.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12205
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: The Sanctuary Doing Some Ironing

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Flagg » 2017-01-12 07:43pm

Simon_Jester wrote:If any administration's sheer craziness can break the "it's all about access" rule, THEN it would be the Trump administration.

If. Then.

Because ultimately, having 'access' to a train wreck is only so valuable, for so long.

Well at least you have hope. :P :lol:
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12038
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby The Romulan Republic » 2017-01-12 09:17pm

FireNexus wrote:
The Romulan Republic wrote:
FireNexus wrote:There's already a thread about the Russian thing. Is this duplicative?


Well, I only posted it here, and its certainly relevant to the topic of this thread- probably more so than the tangent on the definition of terrorism. To my knowledge, no one has posted on these specific developments elsewhere, though I suppose its possible that I missed it.


I was referring to this thread:


viewtopic.php?f=22&t=165969


Ah, apologies. Missed that somehow.

Mods can go ahead and remove it if they feel it would be better suited to that thread.
"Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes" When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy." - Lincoln.

User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 13941
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Sydney, Australia

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Postby Gandalf » 2017-01-13 12:14am

Simon_Jester wrote:If any administration's sheer craziness can break the "it's all about access" rule, THEN it would be the Trump administration.

If. Then.

Because ultimately, having 'access' to a train wreck is only so valuable, for so long.


Trump is ratings gold. A commercial news agency loyal only to shareholders would be crazy not to try and keep Trump onside.
"How you wanna raise a flag with a rifle
To make us want to celebrate anything but survival?
Nah, you watching tele for The Bachelor
But wouldn’t read a book about a fuckload of massacres?"

- A.B. Original, January 26

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin


Return to “News and Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests