Pentagon surveilling Americans without a warrant, Senator Wyden reveals

Post by tpmx » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:13 PM UTC

TheTester wrote: post #83

tpmx wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the extreme asshattery history of Assange, it seems just as probable that he was mostly trying to get some attention with guesses and then later claimed that it was a deliberate disinformation campaign.

Unless you are quite rich and powerful, saying that what Assange has done is mostly "asshattery" is dishonest, yes he has had flukes but consider the mental state of someone being prosecuted and hunted by the most powerful and corrupt people in our planet, mostly what Assange has done s good and denying and calling him an asshat is dishonest and shows a clear bias on your part

Post by reader_mode » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:15 PM UTC

SR2Z wrote: post #124

pmiller2 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Law is primarily about voluntary submission, not power. Let me know how that works out for you, k? I can assure you that although state power ultimately comes from the people, the state most definitely will enforce its laws against you, should you break them. That is, unless you're rich and powerful enough to afford the best lawyers and a handful of legislators.

The state is rarely capable of enforcing the law on more than a small minority of lawbreakers because enforcing the law is expensive. If there's a busy road where people are routinely speeding, the state is actually incapable of pulling every single speeder over and ticketing them. Instead, the state relies on setting reasonable speed limits and scaring drivers with the prospect of fines. This isn't a personal philos…

Post by pmiller2 » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:22 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #125

pmiller2 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Law is primarily about voluntary submission, not power. Let me know how that works out for you, k? I can assure you that although state power ultimately comes from the people, the state most definitely will enforce its laws against you, should you break them. That is, unless you're rich and powerful enough to afford the best lawyers and a handful of legislators.

It may have been a bit overstated, but the core point is solid. One of the main reasons the war on drugs failed is a lack of voluntary submission. Pure enforcement, even with the progressive strengthing of enforcement powers, was simply unable to stop drugs being widely available in the USA. Our society runs on trust and voluntary submission to the rule of law. If either of those went away in a signifant fashion, the…

Post by cema » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:24 PM UTC

jhayward wrote: post #142

TheTester wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you are quite rich and powerful, saying that what Assange has done is mostly "asshattery" is dishonest, yes he has had flukes but consider the mental state of someone being prosecuted and hunted by the most powerful and corrupt people in our planet, mostly what Assange has done s good and denying and calling him an asshat is dishonest and shows a clear bias on your part

> mostly what Assange has done s good No, colluding with the GRU to create false documents interfering with the US Presidential election, resulting in the disaster that was Trump's election can not, in any sense, be called 'good'.

Post by slibhb » Thu, May 13, 2021, 10:32 PM UTC

pmiller2 wrote: post #117

slibhb wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Law is primarily about voluntary submission, not power. A law that is followed only as long as it is enforced is not much of a law and is unlikely to last. In terms of your broader point, something about restricting the authority of a law-giving entity via the law seems paradoxical. An example of this paradox is the fact that it's difficult to have standing to sue the government over an illegal spying program that is…

> Law is primarily about voluntary submission, not power. Let me know how that works out for you, k? I can assure you that although state power ultimately comes from the people, the state most definitely will enforce its laws against you, should you break them. That is, unless you're rich and powerful enough to afford the best lawyers and a handful of legislators.