101–110 of 113 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me spell it out for you then - Ukraine had no interest in shooting down it's own cargo plane. Russia would not likely risk firing a missile from within it's own territory. Who does that leave us? Maybe the people who claim ownership of the space, have the means, and are tweeting about their supposed AN-26 shootdowns? If this is trolling, it's bad trolling.
> Ukraine had no interest in shooting down it's own cargo plane. Cargo -- no. MA plane -- very much. Their so-called ATO (in reality, genocide) failed just recently. Some of their troops were surrounded at UA-RU border by rebels, they are desorganised, some are fleeing into Russia even. At this point Kiev needs something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are war crimes what 'right to be forgotten' is all about? Of course not. I think OP is just pointing out that there are pros and cons. OTOH, if I were leading a technologically sophisticated country to war and had the ability, I might look for ways to make my opponent look bad- say, by posting to internet forums using their hacked accounts- and trust that the internet would not forget.
And how exactly would you get the video of the plane being shot down? The stupidity of the rebels is explanation enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Insert suggestion of false-flag operation in 3, 2, 1...
Well, if there hadn't been any apparent false flag operations in recent times that _would be a ridiculous thing to suggest. As it is, who knows? Sites can be hacked, that we know. And we know some parties have continued interest in stirring up trouble in the region. Was it a false flag operation? Probably not. But if we see a party trying to take advantage of the situation, or escalate conflict over the situation, it…
Hell, saying Ukraine did this as false flag seems especially loony - Russia was drawing down it's forces on the border, down to about 1,000 soldiers (down from over 40,000). Why would they intentionally stir the pot when things were going as they needed them to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that anyone is advocating the 'right to be forgotten' as a way of wiping all content you don't like about yourself from the Internet, or even that it extends to content less than a day old. It has more to do with companies keeping their records on you from now until they go bankrupt (and then sell that data off as an asset to appease their creditors).
The rest of the world will see the actual search results, only Europeans will be left in the dark.
People are already doing this to gain access to locale restricted content, notably on Youtube. In fact, there are browser based plug-ins to automate this.
There is no 'right to be forgotten', really. It just means that, legally, a potential employer who digs up a youthful indiscretion, or a journalist digging for dirt cannot be up front about what they have found. You will not be able to know or challenge the reasons you have been discriminated against. This will be particularly harmful in cases where the damage to your good name is demonstrably false because you will not be able to confront and disprove it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think any of the passengers were from the US.
BBC news quoted airport officials reporting 23 US citizens. Some US passports have also appeared in photographs purporting to be from the scene. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/malaysia-airl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think any of the passengers were from the US.
"The State Department was trying to confirm reports that 23 Americans were aboard the downed aircraft, spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said." ( http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-mis... )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, no kidding they should be on America's Dumbest Criminals.
If you'd follow the story from the very beginning, you'd understand why those "we have Buk" posts were made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me spell it out for you then - Ukraine had no interest in shooting down it's own cargo plane. Russia would not likely risk firing a missile from within it's own territory. Who does that leave us? Maybe the people who claim ownership of the space, have the means, and are tweeting about their supposed AN-26 shootdowns? If this is trolling, it's bad trolling.
> Ukraine had no interest in shooting down it's own cargo plane. Cargo -- no. MA plane -- very much. Their so-called ATO (in reality, genocide) failed just recently. Some of their troops were surrounded at UA-RU border by rebels, they are desorganised, some are fleeing into Russia even. At this point Kiev needs something.