It's the sixth version of The Swamp. What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.sportsfrog.net/phpbb/
Venezuela certainly has a lot of problems, but the ease with which the US political and media establishment is supporting a de facto coup attempt there is a problem. It’s hard to take seriously our criticisms of other countries’ meddling when we continuously support undemocratic right-wing power grabs in Latin America.
If you get a chance, read a little bit about the current King of Thailand. Dude is not altogether there. I think he's happy to just have the military run the country and doesn't want to worry about free and fair elections even though there would be no threat to the monarchy regardless because of how revered the monarchy is in Thailand.Pruitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 08, 2019 7:19 am Thailand Seems to be on the Verge of Something
Royal family member vs. Military man in an election...
It's pretty remarkable how many Thai restaurants in the U.S. have large pictures of the Thai royal family. I'm not kidding at all.brian wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:52 pmIf you get a chance, read a little bit about the current King of Thailand. Dude is not altogether there. I think he's happy to just have the military run the country and doesn't want to worry about free and fair elections even though there would be no threat to the monarchy regardless because of how revered the monarchy is in Thailand.Pruitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 08, 2019 7:19 am Thailand Seems to be on the Verge of Something
Royal family member vs. Military man in an election...
(And if you should ever find yourself traveling in Thailand, do NOT under any circumstances even consider criticizing the King for whatever reason. There's no concept of freedom of speech there where the royal family or the military junta is concerned. I was dissuaded from even talking about the ruling structure even though my questions were mostly wondering how various ministers (i.e. for defense or for state) were appointed and what their terms were.)
I think literally every restaurant I've been to in the US has at least a picture of King Rama IX who was almost universally beloved by the Thais. The kid fell a little bit far from the tree. Buildings and restaurants in Thailand still typically have pictures of Rama IX, though airports and other major public buildings have pictures of both. Rama X technically hasn't been crowned yet though out of respect for Rama IX. That coronation is supposed to happen later this year I believe.Sabo wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:58 pmIt's pretty remarkable how many Thai restaurants in the U.S. have large pictures of the Thai royal family. I'm not kidding at all.brian wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:52 pmIf you get a chance, read a little bit about the current King of Thailand. Dude is not altogether there. I think he's happy to just have the military run the country and doesn't want to worry about free and fair elections even though there would be no threat to the monarchy regardless because of how revered the monarchy is in Thailand.Pruitt wrote: ↑Fri Feb 08, 2019 7:19 am Thailand Seems to be on the Verge of Something
Royal family member vs. Military man in an election...
(And if you should ever find yourself traveling in Thailand, do NOT under any circumstances even consider criticizing the King for whatever reason. There's no concept of freedom of speech there where the royal family or the military junta is concerned. I was dissuaded from even talking about the ruling structure even though my questions were mostly wondering how various ministers (i.e. for defense or for state) were appointed and what their terms were.)
One of the reasons I'm OK moving there even though it is and is likely to remain a military dictatorship for the immediate future is that it is somewhat refreshing that all of the corruption there is out in the open. In a weird way, that makes it almost less corrupt than our own society. There is little misunderstanding about whom needs to be paid off for what. (One of the ways to easily get an 18-month resident visa is to simply pay $100 to a consular officer. To do this you have to have a "lawyer" to whom you pay a $50 bribe. This $150 is a lot easier than trying to go through the red tape of obtaining the visa for "free".)Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 2:10 pm Yeah, I got deep into a dystopian sci-fi book that is based in Thailand and whooo boy that is a very complicated society. (Book took the existing governmental structure and just extended out into the future.)
I think the most interesting thing is the layers of corruption that exists at all levels and (obviously) extends to the police and military. It's amazing ANY business gets done, but part of the unique culture is understanding who gets what bribe and at what level.
The power of the bureaucrat class is something most of western civilization just doesn't understand.
I was going to ask the same thing. NPR just did a thing on the arrest and they focused on the Iraq/Afghanistan leaks, mentioned the Trump coordination as an "oh by the way" thing, and they did not make one mention of his Russian connections, which I thought was pretty well established.rass wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:48 am Help me out. Do we like Assange right now or not?
(this probably isn't a good thing regardless)
He’s about to be prosecuted by the Trump DOJ for revealing war crimes. This undoubtedly is a bad thing.EdRomero wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:56 amI was going to ask the same thing. NPR just did a thing on the arrest and they focused on the Iraq/Afghanistan leaks, mentioned the Trump coordination as an "oh by the way" thing, and they did not make one mention of his Russian connections, which I thought was pretty well established.rass wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:48 am Help me out. Do we like Assange right now or not?
(this probably isn't a good thing regardless)
Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer.
According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States.
The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures.
During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”
You won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
Jeff Sessions and Mike Pompeo have long been obsessed with prosecuting Assange in connection with the Manning leaks. Manning isn’t cooperating because she’s a woman of extraordinary principle. And she’s been imprisoned for that refusal to testify as an act of further vindictiveness.Johnnie wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:20 am And Chelsea Manning was in solitary for 28 days after refusing to testify to a grand jury about WikiLeaks.
Why the hell is she being brought up again? Wasn't her sentence commuted and she was free to be herself or something? Or were these new charges? And why didn't she just cooperate? Would she be implicated? I just don't get it.
It's all part of the fresh hell that is Trump. You don't have to convince me it's bad. But I will laugh that Assange who very much is responsible for Trump in an important way is now ensnared by the fascists he backed. So, yeah, gonna laugh.Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:46 amYou won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:55 amIt's all part of the fresh hell that is Trump. You don't have to convince me it's bad. But I will laugh that Assange who very much is responsible for Trump in an important way is now ensnared by the fascists he backed. So, yeah, gonna laugh.Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:46 amYou won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
I read a lot today saying Assange wasn't a journalist working for a media outlet so it's different. Do you disagree with this or are you worried Trump won't make that distinction and will use it as precedent?Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:46 amYou won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
I think it’s a false distinction and I think that Trump will ignore any such distinction anyway. More established outlets publish wrongfully obtained materials all the time.EdRomero wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:41 pmI read a lot today saying Assange wasn't a journalist working for a media outlet so it's different. Do you disagree with this or are you worried Trump won't make that distinction and will use it as precedent?Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:46 amYou won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
There are gray areas that Trump could exploit one day theoretically to go after an online publication or individual online publishers (i.e. bloggers and the like even if they wouldn't identify as such), but even those exceptions are pretty well baked into protection to publish, so I think Joe's scenario is pretty over-exaggerated.EdRomero wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:41 pmI read a lot today saying Assange wasn't a journalist working for a media outlet so it's different. Do you disagree with this or are you worried Trump won't make that distinction and will use it as precedent?Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:46 amYou won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
What do you think the distinction is between what Assange did with Manning and other outlets that you think are protected by the Pentagon Papers case?brian wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:57 pmThere are gray areas that Trump could exploit one day theoretically to go after an online publication or individual online publishers (i.e. bloggers and the like even if they wouldn't identify as such), but even those exceptions are pretty well baked into protection to publish, so I think Joe's scenario is pretty over-exaggerated.EdRomero wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:41 pmI read a lot today saying Assange wasn't a journalist working for a media outlet so it's different. Do you disagree with this or are you worried Trump won't make that distinction and will use it as precedent?Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:46 amYou won’t be laughing when Trump uses the Assange prosecution as precedent to threaten media outlets with criminal charges for publishing information about his tax returns in 2020. Whatever you think about Assange this is a terrible precedent.tennbengal wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:29 am Ironic that the people who Assange worked his ass off to get elected are prosecuting him. I laughed.
Frankly, if things get to the point where Trump is legitimately threatening to jail journalists for publishing information in the public interest, it's time to time to shut the country down with national strikes and/or sell your possessions and scoot to whatever country will have you because the republic is lost or damn near close to it.
(For the lay person here who is neither a lawyer nor journalist, outlets who published the classified material provided by Manning or Reality Winner in a separate case were not under any danger of arrest based on precedents that go back to the Pentagon Papers and even earlier. That's the example I'm talking about with the understanding that there are gray areas and exceptions to exceptions like if an outlet published classified active military plans for example.)