Purely hypothetical: what if the government is doing this, the CEOs are aware the government is doing this, it's only happened, say three times, and they were given the personal opportunity to review the information requests, and they felt it was justified. Then what? Would they still be cowardly?
Cowards
221–230 of 240 posts
Re: Cowards
#222There's a meme on Reddit that revolves around 'so brave': basically calling people/posts/comments out for obvious pandering. This reads like a pastiche of Keith Olbermann, all bravado and empty gusto. Arrington writes: What has these people, among the wealthiest on the planet, so scared that they find themselves engaging in these verbal gymnastics to avoid telling a simple truth? and then acknowledges that doing so,…
I especially liked the fake incredulity: why would some of the richest people on earth not want to be turned into the next Bradley Manning? Well gee, I simply can't imagine their motivations!
If you don't want to be turned into the next Bradley Manning, don't join the Army and then violate the UCMJ. He's not some innocent private citizen they arbitrarily went after.
Re: Cowards
#223First they came for the terrorists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a terrorist. Then they came for the whistle blowers, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a whistle blower. Then they came for the illegal aliens, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not an illegal alien. Then they came for the hackers--and there was no one left to speak for us.
Whistleblowers and illegal aliens might be morally equivalent to trade unionists and socialists, but terrorists are not equivalent to communists; I said nothing when they came for the terrorists because the terrorists were trying to murder my children.
Communism is revolutionary socialism that seeks to break the system from the exterior rather than fix from the interior as your standard socialism would.
Communism has the utter breaking of current society as the only method to obtaining true communism and thus is not as far from being terrorist activity as one might think.
Re: Cowards
#224First they came for the terrorists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a terrorist. Then they came for the whistle blowers, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a whistle blower. Then they came for the illegal aliens, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not an illegal alien. Then they came for the hackers--and there was no one left to speak for us.
Whistleblowers and illegal aliens might be morally equivalent to trade unionists and socialists, but terrorists are not equivalent to communists; I said nothing when they came for the terrorists because the terrorists were trying to murder my children.
Re: Cowards
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
More likely though they'd go after corporate officers for real or alleged criminal behavior (think of the "honest services fraud" charges against Jeff Skilling, reversed by the Supreme Court on the basis that the law was being stretched well beyond breaking point) and refer to the SEC for investigations.... The government has in the past gone after some extremely powerful corporations and when they had the endurance…
The government create AT&T's monopoly on long distance.
s/create/created/
Re: Cowards
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
Risking one’s own well being to help the community is basically a definition of an altruistic behaviour. Nobody and i mean NOBODY can reach and keep the position of CEO of big international corporation by exhibiting altruistic tendencies. The environment is too competitive and it promotes egoism and punishes altruism. (BTW, The same reasoning stand for political leadership too). So, I don’t think we can really expect…
Okay, let's not call on powerful people to do the right thing then. I mean they were the ones with the ambition to influence the world, so it's pointless to even ask them to have some morals.
Where do you see a connection between influencing the world for personal gains and having morals?
Re: Cowards
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
"First they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the socialists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."
That quote should be, "I didn't speak out because I saw what happens to those that do."
But that's kind of the point; if you don't speak out, it WILL happen to you anyway. As they say, if you don't deal with politics, politics will deal with you.
Re: Cowards
#228Rather than calling anyone a coward, I will acknowledge that standing up for freedom is never easy. I know through direct personal acquaintance people who spent hard prison time during Taiwan's transition from dictatorship to democracy, who were arrested after leading peaceful public protest demonstrations of the kind that happen every day here in the United States. I have seen what kind of sustained effort--and, yes…
> how to win freedom even while under intense pressure from dictators.
That's a great problem and a great starting point for working on that problem.
But that isn't the problem here, because we aren't living under a dictator, not even a non-malicious dictator.
Rather, we have complaints about democratically elected officials. And many of us have given up on everything tied to that system and want to use non-democratic mechanisms (up to and including violence) to resolve our own complaints.
This has two major problems, of course. First, it means we are (illegitimately) overriding interests which should be democratically represented. Second, it opens the door to an arms race where those with competing opinions will do the same to us, and those who are peaceful will be marginalized unless they also embrace anti-democratic tactics.
Re: Cowards
#229Rather than calling anyone a coward, I will acknowledge that standing up for freedom is never easy. I know through direct personal acquaintance people who spent hard prison time during Taiwan's transition from dictatorship to democracy, who were arrested after leading peaceful public protest demonstrations of the kind that happen every day here in the United States. I have seen what kind of sustained effort--and, yes…
It's a hell of a lot easier when you're rich beyond belief; have access to the best legal counsel; have an enormous media platform; have access to lobbyists; have cultivated personal connections to legislators; can pick a very public fight which the NSA dreads getting dragged into; and can threaten obama / the democrats' link to a rich, donor heavy constituency. What John Kiriakou did took courage. What these ceos ne…
Strange that you think these problems will be resolved by attacking one party.
Re: Cowards
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two points 1. The US has killed many many more children in its retaliation for attacks than any so called 'terror' organization has. ( http://www.policymic.com/articles/20884/is-america-like-adam... ) 2. The fear of your children dying is the ultimate weapon for people to control you. There is a strange dichotomy between the pride parents of soldiers have in their child's courage to defend liberty, and the 'do-anythi…
One of the governments primary jobs is protecting you from aggressors. You may not agree with the method a government uses but that doesn't change it's job description. So when they come for the terrorist they are pursuing a legitimate governmental role. When they come for the whistleblower and illegal alien it becomes debatable whether they are pursuing a legitimate governmental role. It's very definitely an apples…
If the government gets to deny human rights to anyone it with a specific label - what does it matter what the label is?
The government should not be allowed to deny human rights to anyone.