Friday, June 23, 2006

Why we should consider a National Secrets Act

Dr. Sanity has this to say on the most recent spilling-of-the-national-security-beans by the MSM (see this for Jeff Goldstein's take on the story, as well).

For those of you who may have missed it, back in early May I posted an in-depth discussion of the basic issues involved, offering a possible remedy based on a law in Britain known as the National Secrets Act. It provides penalties not only for national security employees who leak, but also for the press publishing such secrets, as well.

When I wrote that post, I stated I wasn't sure exactly where I stood on the issue of whether such a law should be passed in this country. However, since then, I have become more convinced that penalties--at the very least, for the leaker--would be a good idea.

After all, it's not as though there aren't other avenues to follow short of disclosure to the press and to the world. A relevant excerpt from my post:

It seems logical to me that in order to have any sort of workable national security at all, it should only be breached for extremely serious governmental offenses, and then only after other ordinary channels have been exhausted and found wanting. My suggestion would be penalties for national security leakers who go to the press first, without trying other remedies, as well as penalties for the press if the information damages national security as defined by the courts (and I would hope they would define it at least somewhat less narrowly than in the Pentagon Papers decision).

76 Comments:

At 1:29 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger ELC said...

You don't seem to understand that the enemy must be defeated at all costs. George W. Bushitler and his minions must be undermined at every turn. Since Republicans took the House in 1994, the entire natural order of the universe has been out of whack. Democrats are simply SUPPOSED to be in charge of everything. And they must not be stopped by any reasonable consideration from getting back in power.

You really need to think about your priorities, neo-neocon.

 
At 1:43 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

Democrats, the ruthless party of unification, nationalism, and the removal of all dissenters. Perfect for war time, as Roosevelt showed.

If LBJ hadn't felt so guilty for those US casualties, he might have been able to be a true Democrat, but the days of the Democrats were fading even then.

As people at blackfive have commented. People don't approve of Bush because Bush is being a P**** when dealing with our domestic insurgency.

I say it is because of Bush's "compassionate conservative principles". That's always the problem when you elect someone with principles, they don't bend.

Others have differing interpretations, but I'll go with mine.

 
At 2:06 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger stumbley said...

So the NYT (and members of the "intelligence community") have taken a program that is demonstrably, by their own reporting, effective, and rendered it virtually useless.

Great. People on the left keep asking, "Do you feel safer now?"

No.

I don't know that we need (or want) to go as far as a National Secrets Act, but, boy, this kind of stuff really makes one wonder. What possible "public interest" does revealing this program serve?

 
At 2:10 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger steve581 said...

"To want so badly to be in charge and possessive of something that youre willing to destroy that something if you cant have it".... Aint it funny how the same description fits OJ Simpson and your garden variety democratic senator?

 
At 4:09 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

I "grew up" with this, Army Regulation 380-5, as my "McGuffey's Primer" on classified material(CM). Everything subsequent just added to it. I still take safeguarding CM very seriously.

We have enough laws regarding release of CM but there is a reluctance by prosecutors to actually apply this laws because they know that prosecutions can become circuses where defendants with political agendas can use any number of tactics to make them almost farcical. And, in the case of the media they have always had to tread lightly.

Just as radicals and "progressives" have infiltrated much of our government since the end of the Viet Nam era, using programs like CETA in local government, so it has been in the Agency where previous administrations have been able to seed their people. Also, since the Agency depends on university educated people, reflexively liberal in the last twenty years or so, just the average intake has changed things. This is true, to a much lesser extent in agencies like NSA, and even in some areas of military intelligence. Although MI has very few and they usually get "deselected" very quickly, spending the rest of their tours as commissary officers or cooks.

In the UK, they do have the Official Secrets Act, and the government does issue the famous "D Notices" which ban the mention in the press of certain material. As an American I've always thought the D Notice was draconian but recent events have changed my mind.

I find that I am much less tolerant these days and advocate measures in countering our internal Fifth Column that would have horrified me twenty years ago. Now I support prosecutions for sedition, conspiracy and the release of CM. Don't even ask me what I would do if verbal dissent turned to general resistance, it'd scare you to death. And, a lot of that derives from my views that Western Civilization is under attack and that this will, indeed, be the Long War.

 
At 4:19 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

The law in Britain is actually "The OFFICIAL Secrets Act" and it does not proscribe penalties for anyone other than a signitory to it i.e. a civil servant, politician or contractor to HMG.

Good to get the facts straight methinks.

 
At 4:52 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

Well, thank you Fudd, too long since I worked in Blighty. Oops, I think I called it the "Official" Secrets Act. Here we would call it the "National Classified Information Act", probably.

And, since I've actually read the whole bloody thing in detail that is all of them, the ones prior to the current 1989, chapter 6, and all of it's classified annexes, I would like you to cite, in detail, supporting the contention in your first para.

There's good pustule. Scurry off now and do your assignment. Then come back when your tutorial is complete.

 
At 5:22 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

No thanks. That is my understanding of how the act works. If you wish to prove me wrong feel free. I'm not above acknowledgement if I am wrong.

I am a grown up after all.

I haven't kept up with recent changes to British Laws with all the hystrerical antiterrorism stuff though. I've been too busy on our own antidemocratic 'reforms'.

 
At 5:49 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger MP Martin said...

Yet again, the New York Times proves to be the definition of the term "useful idiot". Within hours of publication of the story Al Jazeera put the story up on their web site:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B2470566-053D-4054-B4A6-841B67F1FDED.htm

 
At 5:49 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger MP Martin said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 6:19 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

Fudd, you're slippery as snot on a door knob aren't you? Busy? I doubt it unless trolling comments is considered busy. I'm semi-retired what's your excuse?

Oh, and a spell checker is your friend.

The problem with protecting CM is that those who compromise it have been steeped like a tea ball in BSD, "Speaking Truth to Power" and answering to a higher level of morality than the rest of us. It's the only way the scum can justify wearing the other teams colors.

Actually, this story is kinda old news since many of these efforts have been going on to track money flows for plain old crime fighting. The Islamists have come up up with some creative ways around the efforts. But now, the technology can drill down a lot deeper to finer levels of granularity and cast their nets wider in the electronic seas.

It's now possible to to hover just outside some address space and fondle the bits as they fly by. NSF might have given up the administration of the 'Net but every backbone router in cyberspace is vulnerable more then simple packet sniffing. Every device involved in high level routing has some kind of back door built in. There were lots of "whereases" in Stanford's agreement to "give" the technology to the people who founded Cisco. Remember the DOD funded the demonstration project that became the 'Net. All Your Base Are Belong To Us.

My shelf of hardware security "vulnerabilities" is several feet of loose leaf binders. I don't even try to keep up with the software side. Give me a multi-processor Cray, for I intend to sail in harms's way.

 
At 6:27 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Oh, and a spell checker is your friend.


Sometimes my typing lets me down, but I'm not sure what you are referring to here.

I was referring to scrutinising John Howard's utterly draconian and (I believe unconstitutional) so called antiterrorism laws here in Australia.

The rest of your post is gibberish. Are you and Ymar cousins?

 
At 6:53 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

Fudd, you're not technical are you? Kind of a technical naif?

Spend most of your time running in the bush throwing boomerangs at kangaroos and stepping on cane toads? Or are you one of those technology is beneath me kind of blokes?

It's gibberish to you because you are an ignorant Convict who takes pride in his ignorance. That was a nutshell description of cyberwar, putz.

 
At 6:59 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

So, it was off topic gibberish.

And the spell checker comment?

Yeah mate, I chase kangaroos around all the time. That's pretty much all we do over here.

Maybe that's why we live longer, are taller with a lower displacement, have a higher standard of living and a much fairer less violent culture.

No troops on the streets of our cities, mate.

 
At 7:48 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

Off topic, you git. It was speaking to the program that prompted Neo's post or did you not make yourself aware of the story before you began to spew?

There were links intended to inform so that the intelligent among us could discuss the release of classified material. The program that was compromised by the NYT and and the LA Slimes was an aspect of cyberwar.

And, trying to slide out from under your ignorance with a non sequiter about "troops in the streets" and how all Ossie children are above average simply shows you for the ill informed fool that you are. Mate, I've drunk in your bars, so don't try to blow smoke up my a** about how peaceful Oz is. You've got countrymen who would nut you in an instant. So, pull the other one.

 
At 8:31 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Well, if neo's essay was meant to further the discussion of the technical aspects of 'cyber warfare', I certainly missed that part of it.

Silly me.

It wasn't a non sequitur on my part in fact, as you made a fairly dull attempt at a humorous put down of my country (as you are prone to do from your imaginary ivory tower) and I responded in kind.

Admittedly, there isn't much humorous about troops being in the streets of New Orleans.

Actuall I didn't say that Aussie children are above average, merely that we have a better standard of living than you, better health and a less violent society. The fact that you've met a nutter or two in a bar hardly rebutts that.

My knowledge of the Languedoc would suggest to me that if you carried on there as you do here, you'd go missing fairly quickly. Probably in Oz too.

 
At 8:37 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

AND, the story is hardly new or destructive in any way. Any shady group would know that these things have been watched for years. The wingnuts jumping in to chastise the very prorepublican right wing NYT and LAT are boxing at shadows.

Storm in a neocon teacup I'm afraid. My "spew" was merely correcting some sloppy writing by neo.

How'd your soccer team do boys?

 
At 8:41 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger stumbley said...

That's the second time you've referred to the World Cup match of a game you consider beneath you. What's the point? We lost, the team sucks. So?

You are beneath contempt.

 
At 8:55 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Awwwww, Stumbley, where's your sense of humour? Can't I have a dig? You amerofascists aren't going to win hearts and minds by banning banter you know. :-))

When did I ever say "soccer is beneath me"? You're descending to hyperbole again methinks.

 
At 9:11 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Oh BTW Stumbles old chap, I've given you pride of place on my profile page.

 
At 9:20 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

Fudd, let me explain some things to you. I'll try to use small words so you don't get confused.

Blowing the technical means portion of the program which, they did, was unauthorized release of classified information. We have laws against that. I hope that this second incident the media; which you lot tries to pretend is in the pockets of the bosses and wall street types with dollar signs on their vests, smoking big cigars while they trample the proles; will result in prosecutions Pour encourager les autres. Sorry, that's French. Granted they will probably only go to one of our tennis club Federal prisons but, I hear, that the cappuccino is terrible in the federal system.

As an aside, Louisiana's National Guard has been sent to New Orleans. The National Guard is under state control and that means the Demorats, who control the state and the city and in fact the poltical machine in most of the state. They were sent because the local cops either ran away during Katrina, have been fired for looting or are so hopelessly corrupt that they have lost control of order in the city. National Guard are citizen soldiers who leave their jobs as firemen, mail men and just average people to serve their state during times of emergency, either state or Federal. They are hardly the "jackbooted trained killers" who live in your wet dreams. It was purely a state level decision made by Demorats who have lost control.

You're a true piece of work. Come here not even knowing what the topic is, not even caring, just ready to spew. You are really a tosser, are you?

 
At 10:26 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Goesh said...

Yup, the Guard plows open roads up North during severe blizzards and even delivers food to stranded folks, the nazi bastards! Senescent you seem to be getting alot of blood and shit on your boot from kicking that abo's ass.
I hate to quote from a training manual to you, but....
Chapt. 23 sect,14A, Principles of Engagement:upon gut-shooting an enemy, step over the body and move on to the next target...
You ain't supposed to bayonet 'em and kick him in the balls, man. Sheesh!

 
At 10:45 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Oh well, I suppose your dissembling than the bald faced lying of the Sallys or Ymars.

So, there are troops on the streets of New Orleans and not only is it because of deadly violence amongst the community but also because of corruption and cowardice in the police and, further, corruption, ineptitude and stupidity amongst the political leadership.

You are hosing this down how?

Your model looks a little unattractive.

 
At 11:02 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Goesh said...
Yup, the Guard plows open roads up North during severe blizzards and even delivers food to stranded folks, the nazi bastards! Senescent you seem to be getting alot of blood and shit on your boot from kicking that abo's ass.
I hate to quote from a training manual to you, but....
Chapt. 23 sect,14A, Principles of Engagement:upon gut-shooting an enemy, step over the body and move on to the next target...
You ain't supposed to bayonet 'em and kick him in the balls, man. Sheesh!

11:26 PM, June 23, 2006



So....in your mind, the decaying insect is winning this exchange?

Jesus.You are a 'glass is half full' kind of a fascist aren't you?



Wasp, if they've committed a crime, why aren't they being prosecuted? My understanding, from more reliable sources than neo has linked to, is that they were asked not to publish but couldn't be stopped because there was no breach of the law.

I thought that that is what neo's premise was. That there should be a law to allow the executive to censor the press in cases like this. The Official Secrets Act would not cover this in my understanding though.

 
At 11:15 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Wasp,

He lives in a nearly all-white (92%) homogenous society with a population (19.5 million) equal to one of our seaboard urban centers. This partly a result of a racist "White Only" immigration policy for a quarter of a century (1947 -1972).

Their crime rate is going up in regions and there are areas where the police believe they may be losing control to gangs.

Their GDP is 0.75 of the US when corrected for population, but rather small in absolute numbers. In their defence, while the land area is 80% that of the US, a much, much smaller portion is habitable or arable. They tend to huddle on the coasts exclusively.

All of this from their newspapers, the GDP figures are 2001 CIA numbers. These numbers do conflict with other sources such as RIETI, but close enough.

He depends on you not reading their news.

 
At 11:38 PM, June 23, 2006, Blogger Darrell said...

On topic, I am writing my Senators about this, I know for a fact of Wasp or I made one slipup with classified material we would be hanging by our thumbs, stripped of retirement etc. These boobs in Washington need to go to jail. This should be the last straw.
So Fudd, you're down in Oz, been there many time, yer women sure like us yanks, pillow talk I got was that you guys were abusive towards your women and didnt pay any attention to certain needs that we did.
As far as your racist terms you throw around, thats pretty unbelievable seeing how you have and do treat your abos and asians, while a nice society a very very racist one. Funny, I took you for a brit, are you just visiting.
Sorry neo for feeding the trolls again.
CWO3

 
At 12:04 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Darrell,

We have a New Zealander friend that said pretty much the same about the Aussies, without the pillow talk and pleasuring comments.

Every country has its issues. At least, even at our worst, we never completely cut off immigration to non-whites. The gangs the police are losing to are ME, I assume that is what you meant by Asian, or were you refering to Indians, who would much rather come here according to my Indian friends.

 
At 12:15 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Ah there you go Ariel, give up the reasonable facade and get stuck into the shoot the messenger routine like every single one of the combatants previously.

Raw GDP figures can be misleading BTW and post 2001 figures are higher anyway.

As you are well aware I am no fan of our federal government. One of its most heinous and disgusting unAustralian aspects is the introduction of American style negative politics.

 
At 12:18 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Ah Darrell, nice try, child abuse and domestic violence crime figures are actually far higher in the US AND New Zealand.

Women of most countries (men too probably) often like the foreign touch. It certainly is true in your country. I personally have a fascination with Irsish women.

Nice try though. Bye now.

 
At 12:25 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

As for being a racist society, we certainly have our rednecks, but they are in the minority, like most countries.

The White Australia Policy was repealed at about the same time as segregation in your country was an issue.

If you know how to solve the problems of Australian Aborigines (if you know or care what they are) I and the governments would love to hear your thoughts.

Australia is just a country after all, A legal construct. We get good governments and bad governments. John Howard is a prick, but we'd never elect a dolt like Reagan or a Bush twice. I hope.

 
At 12:29 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

He depends on you not reading their news.



Why would you say such nonsense?

OK Ariel, I know you're a sympathiser and I know that you can dissemble with the best of them. But invention is Ymar and Sally level. Tsk tsk. Disappointing.

Any thoughts on the Vincennes story?

 
At 12:33 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Darrell said...

Ariel, yes every country has its issues, what gets me is that we really all do try to get along in the USA for the most part, when I go over to other countries I encounter unbelievable racist feelings, things we could never get away with. Japan is the worst, really nice people but if you are'nt from there you are treated as beneath. I have noticed this in many other countries, in OZ they even hated the people from Taz, said their women were hairy and all sorts of stuff. I notice these things and contrast them to our country. We have come a long, long way in the last 40 years or so. We really are a melting pot, places in europe and asia there seems to be an ingrained racism so I laugh when people say that we are racists, they really dont know. Keep in mind, those of us in the military were chosen as an experiment long ago in race relations and have it pretty much down to a merit based organization. I see almost zero racism in the military, in fact the last I saw that was dealt with was asian against white. Go figure. I noted in Oz how many people were very concerned about Indonesia invading, I mean really concerned, I told them we would never let that happen, we have always been friends with Oz and Nz. We really did save their asses during WWII, which even today gets me beers in the pubs, they have thier kooks like fudd I guess, just like we do, overall a nice people who had me into their homes more than once. I guess I get pissed when people point an acusing finger at the USA when they have worse problems at home.
CWO3

 
At 12:36 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

You amerofascists aren't going to win hearts and minds by banning banter you know. :-))


It's a good thing we've started assassinating people and telling the reporters about it. Far far better when free speech is there to report on it.

Oh well, I suppose your dissembling than the bald faced lying of the Sallys or Ymars.


I don't lie when I say I favor assassinations.

You are hosing this down how?

We had to train our secret police somewhere, Iraq was as good a place as any. Now New Orleans is feeling the efficient of Law and Order. Lotza benefits all around.


Jesus.You are a 'glass is half full' kind of a fascist aren't you?


He's a glass is 1/1000th empty kind of guy.

Wasp, if they've committed a crime, why aren't they being prosecuted?

Because, assassinations.

is that they were asked not to publish but couldn't be stopped because there was no breach of the law.

Right, no assassination law.

I thought that that is what neo's premise was

Neo doesn't favor assassinations the way I do.

That there should be a law to allow the executive to censor the press in cases like this.

Liquidating the press might not be so good for the terror factor if the media won't report on it

Raw GDP figures can be misleading BTW and post 2001 figures are higher anyway.

PPP is better than GDP since it determines what you can "purchase", as in purchasing nukes and nuclear submarines, rather than what you "produce".

Everyone can't make everything, but the US can literally buy anything on the market. Even if we don't make it personally. Our war technology is developed and researched in house, it is not outsourced for national security reasons. So that can never be bought by the Purchasing Parity Power of other nations. What did they say about having all the money in the world and nothing to buy?

child abuse and domestic violence crime figures are actually far higher in the US AND New Zealand.

Hey, Probligo said he didn't need firearms to protect himself while he lives in NZ since there is no need as Probligo explained it. I guess the Aussies disagree.

 
At 12:42 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

I just looked at the Top 500 Universites in the world, and I understand why my India friends, who prize education, are here. Of the top 50 universities, 37 are US, of the top 100 55 are US. Australia was at 56 and 82.

Regarding a National Secrets Act, the Official Secrets Act (1989) Section 5 does allow the prosecution of any person (I assume that it includes newspapers as no mention of an exclusion) releasing "Secrets" without permission. Period. Traditionally, the British only use the threat of prosecution against newspapers to silence them. But the act would allow prosecution.

Such would not pass constitutional muster here when challenged, I would hope. We have laws to cover this, but do not enforce them. I sympathize with those that believe these release were reprehensible. I agree. But the first Amendment is too important to compromise.

Oddly, during WWII Roosevelt had law that would allow immediate prosecution of newspapers for revealing secrets. I don't know whether it was used, or challenged.

 
At 12:49 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Darrell said...

So fudd, some of us commenting here are subject matter experts on some of the things discussed on National Security and classified material. Yet you dismiss what we say out of hand, how smart is that? It smacks of ignorant arrogance. Is that how you treat your loved ones? if you have any. All alone fudd? is that why you lash out at us? Dont think I missed by much. We do more for the world on supposedly liberal causes than any other country yet you spit, it must be a personal thing, maybe I know some of your female relatives, is that it?
CWO3

 
At 12:57 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

Duplicating my response over on the Doc, with some small measure of alterations:
================================
> How about a National Secrets Act, or some version thereof, as a possible remedy?

ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!

See the movie "In the Name of the Father" if you want to see why "National Secrets Acts" are dangerous.

When you talk about giving more power to keep secrets, then I suggest you see that movie, and also "Enemy of the State". Yes, they are both "just movies", but the concerns therein are quite reasonable and totally applicable to the modern world and the situation we have. "ItNotF" is based on real events, as well as having a rather appropriate acronym.

We need to walk a fine line between controlling these lying Pieces of Shit, and strapping on our own slave collars.

Do any of YOU want your children to have to go up against the modern Army in insurrection -- especially after they have another 20 years of weapons development and insurgent suppression tactics?

The government needs to be kept on a tight leash.

The USA is by far the most dangerous government on the planet -- and we, its citizens, cannot forget this.

No, *I* DONT FEAR IT RIGHT NOW.

But I can look down the road and see where IT COULD TRAVEL. I'd have to be damned BLIND not to see it.

Think of what Hillary could do with the powers of which you speak.

Think of what her successor could do after 8 years of her depredations.

We cannot think only of the moment when we discuss relaxing controls -- we need to consider the future, as well, and the key question -- How will we retain control?

Several problems with using the past relaxations of civil rights as excuses for current relaxations come to mind:

1) the people of the USA are far more sheep now than at any time in the past. Decades of that @##%#%^ excreble "Germanic System of Education" combined with creeping Socialism has shredded the spirit of independence and self-reliance. It would be much, much tougher to get the fat, indolent masses to revolt than it did in the past.
2) the military has far more firepower at its behest at any time in the past, and now has extensive experience in suppression of insurgencies.
3) Congress is more arrogant now than at any time in the past as to it having special privileges ("Why, no, Mr. Jefferson, you don't have to submit to a search warrant!". "Why, No, Ms. McKinney, strike away!") which the rest of us don't.
4) The judiciary has demonstrated clear weakness in suppressing the obvious depredations of government -- particularly in the form of seizure. See Kelo. See Rico. Why would you expect this to get better, or to be certain in other arenas?

We aren't there -- yet -- but it's not hard to see us stumbling blindly down that path.

"There is no week, nor day, nor hour, when tyranny may not enter upon this country, if the people lose their supreme confidence in themselves - and lose their roughness and spirit of defiance."
- Walt Whitman -


Abre Los Ojos.

.

 
At 1:02 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

Fudd, you stupid sheep dagger, it's called "prior restraint" we don't have D Notices. Google that you dumb pillock.

Australian women don't get much respect from the men there due to the tradition of "mateship", a vestige of the convict days when it was pretty much a segregated all male society and sexual release was... Well, it's still called getting a bit of brown. Male/Male relationships are still more important.

Also remember that this is a society in which male lambs are still castrated by the shepard biting them off.This is their real national past time not soccer or Australian Rules Football. It's pretty much all drinking to excess and biting off lambs balls in a society of repressed homosexuals.

Is it any wonder that so many of them are deranged?

 
At 1:04 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Darrell said...
So fudd, some of us commenting here are subject matter experts on some of the things discussed on National Security and classified material. Yet you dismiss what we say out of hand, how smart is that? It smacks of ignorant arrogance. Is that how you treat your loved ones? if you have any. All alone fudd? is that why you lash out at us? Dont think I missed by much. We do more for the world on supposedly liberal causes than any other country yet you spit, it must be a personal thing, maybe I know some of your female relatives, is that it?
CWO3

1:49 AM, June 24, 2006


Hmmm, well Darrell, if I believed you I make take note of your thoughts but anyone who was in the sort of position that you and wasp would claim a) wouldn't be advertising the fact and b) using such rank bait as the patheitic sexual innuendo that you use in the hope of scoring any sort of hurt. I've probably been closer to the centres of power than you have anyway. Didn't like what I saw much.

Indonesia has been our biggest strategic concern of the last 30 years. Understandably. Maybe you misinterpreted their concerns though which would mostly revolve around the duplicity of the US.

We do rely on treaties for our national security and yes you did save our bacon in the battle of the Coral Sea, while our troops were stuck defending British overseas territories for the little prick Churchill.

Many Australians are coming to the obvious conclusion that with the likes of the current republicans in power a treaty is worth nothing anyway.

Its all about credibility ain' it? You have none.

Pathetic attempt. Thanks for playing.

 
At 1:07 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

> Pour encourager les autres. Sorry, that's French.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Don't encourage them.

They're all to senselessly arrogant as it is.

(8o)

 
At 1:07 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Oh yeah wasp, more of your sexual fantasies. This rubbish really hurts me you know. Please please stop it. Ooooh ah. Oh god.


Very mature guys. Rock bottom approaches rapidly.



Vincennes? Lockerbie anyone?

 
At 1:08 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Darrell,

I've run into the same with visitors here. The Germans were obnoxious, for example. But this would all be too anecdotal without having visited Germany. My dealings with Brits have always been gentlemanly, although I've read their courtesies are breaking down.

One of the issues with abuse of children and wives, some cultures hide it better than others so crime figures can be suspect. Also, the laws themselves affect reporting results, our VAWA puts men in the mill in even the slightest incident, no matter who is actually to blame. And greatly inflates the abuse reports. Comparing official numbers even across states in the US raises issues of apples to oranges. FBI stats are better, but then they are a compilation of the separate states.

When I was in the military in the 70s, the racial issues were rock-bottom minimal, especially aboard cutter. The Army had the most issues but the black/white tension was also still high after the hot summers of the 60's so I'm surprised at how little it actually was. Of course, if you read the self-serving newsreports of the other Western countries, the KKK was running rampant. Meanwhile, we get little snippets of the racial tensions and explosions in those oh-so-racially good countries. But then, they are often oh-so-racially homogenous than is the US.

My real kick is how many of them think they are US experts, from constitutionla law to racial issues. Go figure.

We really should stop as this could be considered hijacking of the thread. Fun though.

 
At 1:12 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

> So, there are troops on the streets of New Orleans and not only is it because of deadly violence amongst the community but also because of corruption and cowardice in the police and, further, corruption, ineptitude and stupidity amongst the political leadership.

Ah. You, uh, you DO realize that ALL the leadership involved there are DEMOCRATS, perhaps? Most of the citizenry vote consistently for ummmm, yas, DEMOCRATS...?

You're thinking somehow that areas dominated by Labor candidates are somehow reflective of the Tories, are you?

 
At 1:15 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger stumbley said...

Oh BTW Stumbles old chap, I've given you pride of place on my profile page

Well, honesty is the best policy.


"When did I ever say "soccer is beneath me"? You're descending to hyperbole again methinks."

mmm...perhaps "beneath me" wasn't the proper construction....I just thought you weren't that fond of it due to this...

"Oh, and BTW, I don't give a flying F about soccer. It is a game of cheating, play acting and dishonesty."

Me, hyperbolic?

 
At 1:29 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Darrell said...

Ariel, yes I picked up on that about the statistics, last I knew down there nobody paid much attention to the beating of wives if she deserved it, so the statistics are probably false. I apoligize to neo for hijacking the thread, this guy needs confronted. I normally dont do this but he really has been pissing on this blog since he showed up. Thats sad, I enjoy Neo's deep thoughts. The fact that he would have the audacity to claim that I have no credibility with zero information related to that is true evidence of ignorant arrogance. What a damn maroon. I'm out.
CWO3

 
At 1:31 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

stumbley said...
Oh BTW Stumbles old chap, I've given you pride of place on my profile page

Well, honesty is the best policy.


"When did I ever say "soccer is beneath me"? You're descending to hyperbole again methinks."

mmm...perhaps "beneath me" wasn't the proper construction....I just thought you weren't that fond of it due to this...

"Oh, and BTW, I don't give a flying F about soccer. It is a game of cheating, play acting and dishonesty."

Me, hyperbolic?

2:15 AM, June 24, 2006


A subtle difference but a difference nevertheless.

My statement is not hyperbole at all. Professional soccer is these days.

 
At 1:34 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Darrell,

Fudd is probably, I'm sure, a good family man and has several children. Either owns or participates in a family business, and claims to be wealthy. He hates the US for our support of Israel. It tends to lead to "confirmation bias".

He will not give an inch, where it matters, and will use the same techniques that he blames others of using, but will use them more often and more egregiously.

He is a self-appointed expert on the US who doesn't know that our segregation laws began to be dismantled even before Brown v Board of Education (1954). Or that the final law dropped was around 1968 on miscegnation. But segregation had ended earlier. He fails to realize that in 1965, his "whites-only" immigration was relaxed to allow "non-white" Europeans, and finally dropped in 1972. Of course, if you only let in a few...The basis of the law was to maintain racial and cultural purity, which could be called fascist but isn't except to the confused. Given that even in 2001 the population was 92% white, it seems to have had the intended effect. Our "white" population numbers are inflated, because all Latinos are considered white, even if mestizo. Probably doesn't work that way in Australia.

Anyway, Darrell, its best to talk about and not to, the ranting is fun to watch. Personal insults are the MO if nothing else serves. He still thinks its his ideas...

Obloodyhell,

Good to see you here. you are a fun read.

 
At 1:38 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

So, Ariel you are implying that Australia's domestic violence laws are less robust than the US? These are actually state laws but I can assure you that in NSW and Qld they are some of the strongest in the world. Domestic violence and child abuse are problems all over the world but to imply that they are more prevalent than in the US and NZ is quite wrong and you know it.

My wife actually works in this field so I'll ask her about it. I'll ask her about NZ attitudes to Aussies as well too shall I? I'll also ask her to reread some of neos blatherings and see if she wants to change her opinion that she suffers from PTSD shall I?

Idiot. You're firing pathetic blanks as is Dad's Army fool.

 
At 1:43 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Yep. Getting more and more like Sally every post. Hypocrite heaven.


Still no thoughts on your blanket (but wildly false) statements on the Vincennes outrage?


Can't argue a point? Reduce the argument to racial abuse. Geeez you 'classic liberals' ain't what they used to be.

 
At 1:46 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Anyway, Darrell, its best to talk about and not to, the ranting is fun to watch. Personal insults are the MO if nothing else serves. He still thinks its his ideas...



That's right Ariel. Run away. Pathetic coward. Join the cheerleaders.

 
At 1:47 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Neo's deep thoughts



Now, THERE"S a giggle.

 
At 1:51 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

OBloodyHell said...
> So, there are troops on the streets of New Orleans and not only is it because of deadly violence amongst the community but also because of corruption and cowardice in the police and, further, corruption, ineptitude and stupidity amongst the political leadership.

Ah. You, uh, you DO realize that ALL the leadership involved there are DEMOCRATS, perhaps? Most of the citizenry vote consistently for ummmm, yas, DEMOCRATS...?

You're thinking somehow that areas dominated by Labor candidates are somehow reflective of the Tories, are you?

2:12 AM, June 24, 2006


Not sure what you point is here and I'm pretty sure you've missed mine.

Is the answer to ban the democrats and control the press or something? Sorry, I thought you were claiming not to be fascists. I'm confused.

 
At 2:07 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

"All generalizations are wrong. including this one." That's called a paradox, Fudd.

It is fun; punching Fudd around like he was an ugly, red headed, step child; it's really just shooting fish in a barrel. But, a blow up punch me doll gets really boring. We can get a lot of giggles using him like a speed bag, but that gets boring too.

I'm still really uncomfortable with prior restraint of the press. The media used to serve a vital function but has no real respect anymore from anyone. The NYT will have to go private in a while since its stock price is tanking and the LA Slimes will probably be sold to a consortium of area businessmen. Thats a lot of the reason why they are being so reckless. They're just waiting for the prosecutors hammer to fall on them so that they can try to rally the faithful away from the electronic world. It ain't going to work. They'll go down just like the French knights; swarmed over by English yeomen, probing with daggers for the soft parts.

I think after a few people both in and out of government get some slammer time for release of classified material and the sedition laws get dusted off, a lot of it will stop. They'll also have to come right out into the open about supporting the downfall of their own country and why they feel that way.

I don't give a obese rodents glutes about the opinion of foreigners. To me, it just sounds like the wind blowing from one ear through to the other; kind of an odd whistling noise. Irritating, like a fly.

Right now, there are a lot of prosecutors just praying that they won't get the call to proceed. But, eventually, one of them is going to hold a finger up to the wind and decide that they are hearing the call of the voters and that political careers like Rudy's can be made on a good slam dunk case. In any event, they are re-learning the skills of conspiracy prosecutions which are much easier to make. One indication is how many inquiries are hitting Lexis/Nexus and specialized legal search engines on some very interesting topics.

And, the winds are shifting. One good indication is that the Leftist Noise Machine is running at ten.

Ymar, we are a nation of laws and if we don't want to lose our souls during the process of Spartifying the US, assassinations are not on the agenda. It's going to be hard enough to keep to our core values in the next few years and it would behoove all of us to model those values in speech and conduct. Talking tough and joking around are one thing, but we are at a serious task here. What may be needed is command presence and bearing. It's easy to lose track of that. It has always resonated with Americans from Washington on. Syles of leadership may change but the fundamental priciples do not. The pomposity of a MacArthur may seem strange to us now. But, it worked in its time and place. I really like to watch the CENTCOM and DOD briefers for that reason.

Oh, and the reason they don't speak Japanese in Darwin,Oz, may have had a lot to do with old Dugout Doug.

 
At 2:36 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Wasp,

Did you not notice that Fudd never mentioned or admitted being clueless about the Official Secrets Act (1989), but flew off on a tangent instead?

Really, if you would not engage but only talk about you can watch the level of bile and insults rise to explosive levels. Its quite fun to watch. Remember, he holds that there are no rules in arguing, thats a summation not a quote, so why would you bother? Besides, you know he can't tell a fascist from a jingoist or a chauvinist for that matter, which really muddies things up. One of the kicks I get, especially Europeans but Aussies will do, is how they scream fascist all the time. Godwin's Law rocks.

Anyway, have fun.

 
At 2:52 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Ymar,

You do need to tone it down a bit. Violence can sort out a clear cut problem, like the Nazis, but used too early and easily just makes a mess. And people die, innocent people.

The only reason I support the Iraq war, I realize the geopolitical importance of Iraq, is that to cut-and-run will leave the Shia, the Kurds, or the Sunni to hang. Remember that the first Iraq war did just that. Tens of thousands of Kurds and Shia died in Baathist reprisals after that war. Its one of the reasons that the Shia were so reserved when we removed Saddam. They figured we would cut-and-run and leave them to die again.

 
At 3:04 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Oh, and the reason they don't speak Japanese in Darwin,Oz, may have had a lot to do with old Dugout Doug.


I've already acknowledged that. I'm not the nationalist here. That is why the pathetic attempts at insult by the Darrells and Ariels of this world don't work. Given the diaspora of my family, it's pretty comical.

 
At 3:09 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Really, if you would not engage but only talk about you can watch the level of bile and insults rise to explosive levels. Its quite fun to watch.




Total fake Ariel. The bile, innuendo and stupidity is coming from me is it?

You'd have made a great Waffen SS NCO Ariel. Just following orders Mein Herr. Belsen was a gas.

 
At 3:11 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

They figured we would cut-and-run and leave them to die again.



I'd say they're banking on it. Plenty of history to support the proposition after all.

No credibility,no ethics, no moral high ground.

 
At 3:24 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Yeah wasp, you've beaten me like you beat the Vietnamese, the Koreans, the Somalis, the Afghans and now the Iraqis.

You'll cut and run like always. No moral fibre, no understanding beyond the superficial, little intellect in the leadership and a belief that your nonexistant god is on your side.

You'll leave for others to clean up the mess and then try to rewrite history to cover it up. Tough guys indeed.

 
At 3:27 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Checkmate you silly little fool.
Look at what you've written. You're way too easy to minipulate, I eschewed this for years as to guilty a pleasure but now its time. And you go on and on....

Neo, if you ban me that's fine.

 
At 3:28 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Anyways chaps. It's been fun, but I've got dinner to go to, a great bottle of '71 Grange to drink with it and a rugby test to watch.

Cheers.

Do do better tomorrow, won't you? The child abuse stuff is on the nose by the way. It reveals you as desperate and unethical.

Ariel, Belsen. You'd have been great.

 
At 3:30 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

Ariel said...
Checkmate you silly little fool.
Look at what you've written. You're way too easy to minipulate, I eschewed this for years as to guilty a pleasure but now its time. And you go on and on....


Oh really? I think you've lowered yourself because you can't admit your moral bankruptcy.

Just a thought. Toodle pip.

 
At 3:52 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

The discussion thread on this topic seems to have died out into punching Fudd again. He was running out of phony memes recently and threw up the Vicennes and Lockerbie incidents.

Someone already handed him his head on the Vincennes. I've read the point by point refutation of the Left's conspiracy theory and a credible job was done, given the constraints of this format.

I haven't read the Left's presentation of the Lockerbie incident. I can imagine what it is. But I suppose we'll soon hear it. I frankly am tired of his repetative posting of the same tired old left claptrap. I await his ultimate banning when Neo changes servers and formats. So, I'm going to head out for a weekend of natural history in the boonies.

ariel, notice that he has trotted out the Nazi meme for you? That means you drew blood on your last few banderillas Nice placement; right in the hump. Bravo Zulu.

If he had any knowledge of Web manners or moral fiber at all he would realize that he has auto-Godwinated several times. We can only pray that he auto-Darinates.

Don't run. You'll only die tired and sweaty.

The Snipers Motto

Take care all.

 
At 4:51 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Wasp,

Exactly. I am at about 3 out of 4 minipulations now. Look for checkmates at other posts of Neo's, this is where I laid the groundwork to get him to act the way I want, but a checkmate only if I get the gist of what he will say next.

The Godwin comment should have given him a clue, but the "scream fascist" probably planted and he couldn't help himself.

I used to play like this with pompous, arrogant asses just to see how many checkmates I could get. Trolls are more fun when you don't play by your rules but play by their's instead, at which time they whine about your moral bankruptcy, desperation, unethical, call you coward, etc., all of these are manipulations (yeah, I hit the wrong key before, but I didn't care about spelling) to get you to play. Notice the air of constant superiority until you do as I said, talk about them not to them, never directly to them, then they come unhinged. This way you avoid having to use their rules against them. I should stick to it, but the pleasure...

Notice, you never did get an acknowledgement that he was wrong about the Official Secrets Act? Notice too he didn't acknowledge that he was off a few years on segregation? I had expected him to throw out busing or some other clueless thing. Oops, that makes me 3 out of 5, darn it I'm rusty.

Notice the "appeal to authority" regarding abuse statistics for NZ, Australia, and the US, with "my wife works in this field". Meaningless drivel. Of course, he asked his wife and he was right. I would never have expected that, no siree. I got hit with "unethical" for that one, even though I used one of his techniques back on him. This is just way too funny now.

It is Neo's blog, and she wants us to ignore him. I should stop the game. I will eventually hate myself for this. But he follow's Forrest Gump's mother's Law. It makes it too easy.

Enjoy the nature hike.

 
At 6:59 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Sally said...

I know it's been said, many times, many ways, but responding to trolls in any way -- as, indirectly, this is -- only sucks you into their game and gives them the attention they've become dependent on. And in the process, destroys any real conversation, including debate, that might otherwise have occurred. Neo's troll-squashing scheme, whatever it is, can't come too soon to my mind.

But since it's too late for this thread anyway, I thought I'd just point out that to take confud as a representative Aussie is an unnecessary insult to that nation -- as insulting, for that matter, as it would be to humanity if anyone were to take him as a representative human being. For a better view of Oz, have a look at this recent Krauthammer piece, from which I can't resist quoting a long segment:

Australia is the only country that has fought with the United States in every one of its major conflicts since 1914, the good and the bad, the winning and the losing.

Why? Because Australia's geographic and historical isolation has bred a wisdom about the structure of peace -- a wisdom that eludes most other countries. Australia has no illusions about the "international community'' and its feckless institutions. An island of tranquility in a roiling region, Australia understands that peace and prosperity do not come with the air we breathe, but are maintained by power -- once the power of the British Empire, now the power of the United States.

Australia joined the faraway wars of early-20th-century Europe not out of imperial nostalgia, but out of a deep understanding that its fate and the fate of liberty were intimately bound with that of the British Empire as principal underwriter of the international system. Today the underwriter is America, and Australia understands that an American retreat or defeat -- a chastening consummation devoutly, if secretly, wished by many a Western ally -- would be catastrophic for Australia and for the world.

When Australian ambassadors in Washington express support for the U.S., it is heartfelt and unalloyed, never the "yes, but'' of the other allies, perfunctory support followed by a list of complaints, slights and sage finger-wagging. Australia understands America's role and is sympathetic to its predicament as reluctant hegemon. That understanding has led it to share foxholes with Americans from Korea to Kabul. They fought with us at Tet and now in Baghdad. Not every engagement has ended well. But every one was strenuous, and many quite friendless. Which is why America has such affection for a country whose prime minister said after 9/11, "This is no time to be an 80 percent ally," and actually meant it.

 
At 9:17 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Willy said...

Official Secrets Act (Exracts)

The Official Secrets Act is any of several Acts of the United Kingdom Parliament for the protection of official information, mainly related to national security. The latest revision is Official Secrets Act 1989 (1989 chapter 6), which removed the public interest defence by repealing section 2 of Official Secrets Act 1911.
...
Section 5 - further disclosure or publication of information obtained in contravention of other sections of the act. It allows, for example, the prosecution of newspapers or journalists who publish secret information leaked to them by a crown servant in contravention of section 3. This section applies to everyone, regardless of whether they are a government employee, or whether they have signed the act.
...
In order for a crime to be committed, the following conditions must apply:

1. the disclosure must not be by means permitted in section 7
2. the person making the disclosure must know, or should know, that their disclosure is unauthorised
3. the disclosure must cause harm to the UK or its interests, or it could reasonably be believed that harm could occur, and
4. the person making the disclosure must know, or should know, that such harm could occur

The sections pertaining to crown servants, intelligence officers, and government contractors apply only to information obtained by that person in the course of their official duties; these sections do not apply if the information was obtained by other means (although section 5 would apply).

It is not a defence under the act that the disclosure is in the national or public interest.

 
At 9:51 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

About the subject that you shouldn't give more executive power to Hillary. That's looking into the far future, but what about now? If you refuse to take drastic action now, a terroist attack will happen, and Hillary still might be President. So what then, what are you going to do when 65% of the people demand protection and HIllary is in office, what do you think she could do with that popular mandate?

People in power have ways of using it, it doesn't matter if they have laws backing them or not. What really matters is if they have the country backing them, and not having good laws in place to protect sources will allow Hillary to expunge the records, agents, and sources and then claim credit for reconstruction after an attack.

Ariel You do need to tone it down a bit. Violence can sort out a clear cut problem, like the Nazis, but used too early and easily just makes a mess. And people die, innocent people.

Tone it down to what, I'm talking to Confude here. If I'm talking to you Ariel, I would take different positions, but this is Confude here. See the difference?

I'm not doing the personal insult route with Confude, I take a different road.

If you want to tone it down, Ariel, stop insulting Confude as Wasp does continually and you do directly and indirectly. People and I didn't come here to read who can insult who better with snappy retorts and all that, if I wanted to see that I'd be watching Crossfire and Michael More.

 
At 1:12 PM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Ymar,

Don't worry I know, I decided to play his game for a short time because he is too easy. And you have to admit I resisted a long time.

Don't get upset on the tone it down, there is more than a generation between us, partly because I wasn't raised by my parents, and some of the military gung-ho does jangle my nerves. It wasn't a rebuke. And if you were playing your own game with Fudd that is certainly OK.

Sally,

Australia is a great country. Fudd uses the "I don't care I'm not a nationalist" as part of his cloak of superiority. Think of how he mocks us if we defend our country, notice how his feathers ruffled so easily once Australia is demeaned. Australia does have racism as part of its past, as i wrote elsewhere my family could not have migrated there, but began the final dismantling in 1972. I've read the Krauthammer article, it puts Fudd in a most humorus perspective.

Talking about him indirectly, I mean addressing some of his points, but never directly to him, will cause him to explode. Attention is only truly satisfying if direct. Anything else is infuriating for him. Until he goes away, I thought it would be fun to watch him go up in small explosions.

Remember what Brad wrote, Fudd's a nasty bully. Go after him as he does you and he starts whining and crying while his insults keep increasing. He depends on others to follow the rules he won't. Its the advantage he needs in arguing. He won't concede a point no matter how wrong, because he can't be wrong.

His words no longer have any real meaning to me so the insults no longer work. Look at them for the silliness they are and the only emotion they'll invoke is laughter. Mixed with a tinge of sadness that there are people actually like him. Sad caricatures. That was the tone of "silly little fool. Look at what you've written."

I'll take both your replies as rebukes to stop.

 
At 1:43 PM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

It wasn't a rhetorical question. You said tone it down and didn't specify what, you just mentioned the violence and death of civilians. I don't like to kill civiliansnor support their death, not very useful. If you want to discuss this, I'm amenable to reason, as weary g has seen first hand, that if he asks and engages me, I will explain my position further rather than insulting them or reacting emotionally.

I work with what I have, I don't have enough to engage in any reasonable discussion with you, Ariel, over what I should or should not tone down in whatsoever manner was deemed fitting.

So what I do is outline what I do, and if that seems upset, then that is probably because I keep it short and to the point, so that the tone becomes frank, cutting, and curt. If you criticize a flaw in my beliefs, I will correct that flaw to the best of my ability, and then stop.

I try not to go into tangents until people I'm talking to, like you, have a chance to further explain themselves. This may also seem upseting and emotional, but it's just curt.

I'm looking out for your interests, Ariel, if you want to tone it down, then I don't see why my comments can be considered more egregious to you than wasp's or your own. If you notice, I didn't get on your case about talking to Confude, from the time you started to now. As I said before, it's wiser to let people discover for themselves rather than trying to convince them otherwise.

I understand now that the military gung ho ness jangles your nerves. I don't presume to know why, but I do know that it jangles Confude's nerves as well. Now I don't lie outright about assassination or what not, I get the benefit of both. I don't have to insult Confude, to make him lose temper or emotional balance. I just tell the truth, okay, the truth with some manipulation of COnfude's meanings.

As for the point about not talking to someone, instead talking about them. i think the most effective way to do that is to be ultra-rational and logical. Extra work must be conducted to take a subject matter, and integrate Confude's words into as an example rather than a thesis. If all you do is talk about what Confude has talked about, then he sets the subject. But instead, if I derive a point from Confude that he did not mean, and then talk about it with references to confude, then I believe that is effective in creating understanding and enlightenment.

I don't disagree with Ariel on the principles of cooling down by talking about someone, as if they aren't here, rather than talking to them like a heated argument.

I disagree simply with the devil, in the details that is. If the militaristic gung ho stuff annoys you Ariel, then I can only promise to tone it down if I talk to you. However, give me the same benefit of consideration I gave you, in not trying to dictate what I say to other people. Otherwise, I don't feel the need to give you the same freedom of tolerance in conducting your own affairs here according to your conscience and not my judgement that you are unwilling to accord to me. Fair's fair after all.

 
At 1:43 PM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 4:56 PM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Ymar,

Boy you write fast. Where we disagree, let's agree to disagree. Clarity is more important than agreement.

And I will show you courtesy for courtesy.
Fair is fair.

 
At 6:47 PM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

It looks like I write fast, but I just tend to think I write so much, I don't notice the time anymore.

My position and belief is that what people think is more important than whether they agree with me or not. Therefore I tend not to have emotional connections if you disagree on fundamentals, which is true for many people who don't go crazy because of politics. But fundamental things like human decency, the lives of virtuous men and women, those things matter, and people who push those people into the mud, anger me as any injustice would.

It's not that they don't care (or because everyone agrees with the neo-cons), it is just that if it was really important, they'd be killing people for it, and since they aren't willing to kill anyone thus it must not be so important.

The importance of a belief, I tend to judge, is based upon how many are willing to die and kill for it. On this scale, Islamic JIhad ranks pretty high, but so does American patriotism.

 
At 7:56 PM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Ariel said...

Ymar,

I'll give you a little story, a true story. The first time I shredded a target. The ladder was perfect, one over, one under, range established, the third round found its mark. All done on a radar screen. I was ecstatic. Jubilant. My supervisor, an E-5 Southerner who had been in Vietnam a year or two before, I can't remember now, said the following after congratulating me for a good shot: "I hope you never have to do that for real. You just killed someone, shredded someone's father, husband , or brother. A mother, a sister, a wife, a child, will be crying because of what you just did. Don't ever forget that. Ever." He said it in that very slow Southern drawl, you know, that redneck drawl, emphasizing each word, telling me I had, if it were real, just destroyed a family. Destroyed hopes and dreams. I never felt the same jubilance again. That's why my nerves jangle a bit, even though I never had to destroy those hopes and dreams. I've children of my own now, and his words are even more poignant

I want the fewest deaths of my people, and the innocent Afghanis and Iraqis, and even the insurgents, as possible to prosecute these wars.

 
At 12:59 AM, June 25, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 1:03 AM, June 25, 2006, Blogger Senescent Wasp said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 2:56 PM, June 25, 2006, Blogger Ymarsakar said...

I'm looking at it from a different perspective. Too many times have I experienced the opposite of using enough force, my experiences have always been with using too little force.

Morality and ethics is the chain by which violence and rage is controlled, and funneled to proper use. Proper disciplined use.

However, if you truly want to save the lives of innocents, then you will have to make the same choice that I did. Will you favor total war and total violence, in the hopes of getting rid of enough evil men and women such that innocents can safely live their lives in order rather than chaos? Or will you shirk from your duty to the innocent, conduct less violent operations, and allow the evil sadists to overwhelm those who you are sworn to protect because you felt guilty?

It goes both ways. You can be guilty of killing someone that didn't want to hurt you, and you can be guilty of not killing someone that meant to hurt you or your family or those under your care.

The situation as it exists right now, with Bush giving Geneva Convention protection to terroists, with Bush refusing to take on the legal claptrap that says terroists are protected by the US Constitution, and in which the Bush Admin does not conduct punitive or public executions in order to prevent the 2 executions of captured US military men, is not an example of violence taken too far. Rather the opposite

How many children, women, wives, brothers, and sisters will the Iraqis suffer having seen torn asunder in front of them before they will unleash the full might of their armed forces? We protect Iraq and our strength outmatches them 1000 to 1, what duty do we have to protect innocent Iraqis who just want to live in peace, from the murderous terroist jihadists when their own forces are incapable of exerting enough power to do what they need to do?

Your trainer did you a favor, because he saw how happy you were. It is best to prepare for the ethical challenge now, rather than later when he will not be there. But this is not an excuse when people are under your protection as it they are under Bush's protection. And it is irrelevant when you realize the target you are killing is indeed responsible for death and destruction and will be responsible for more death and destruction until you end it.

It is not an excuse to choose less violent more peaceful methods, when peaceful methods do not work.

I or those part of the military, I presume, do not feel an ounce of guilt for having seen a successful assassination operation of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi or any other terroist. We indeed feel joy. Joy that a human being was liquidated literally from the inside out by sonic shock waves and over pressure? yes, indeed. Your trainer put more pressure on you because nobody would be responsible for who you shoot or what your ROE would be, civilians had to go by their own ethical compass and make their own decisions to shoot or not to shoot. Thus your standard is higher, yet your chances of kill or be killed are lower.

Doubt is a useful counter-balance to rage and anger, but it does not excuse us from making the hard choices when it is time to make them.

Lyndon B Johnson wanted the same thing that you wanted, less casualties. That was not an excuse to fight a war of attrition, and it did not help at all, if you ask the Vietnam veterans.

David Weber has explored the dichotomy between peace and war, attack or defend, surrender or victory through his Honor Harrington novels. While they are gripping, they are also educational, in that it forces the reader to see it from all perspectives, enemy and friend alike.

 
At 5:39 PM, June 25, 2006, Blogger confusedforeigner said...

At 5:51 AM, June 24, 2006, Ariel said...
Wasp,

Exactly. I am at about 3 out of 4 minipulations now.



I think I have to allow myself just one "lol" now.

Thus....ROTFFLMFAO.



Vincennes or cut and run again?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home


Powered by Blogger