Tuesday, 5 December 2017

White House Purposes Secret Police to Handle Bullshit Conspiracy

quote [ Blackwater founder Erik Prince, a former CIA paramilitary officer, and Oliver North want to make 80s-style covert action great again. ]

Whoa. WHOA. What the actual fuck?

Okay, so this is one of those "time to buy a gun" moments for me. I am a rationalist sceptic. As such, I am a total cunt you never want to debate with. However, one aspect of this is that I am fundamentally opposed to conspiracy theory.

This action here? This is the sort of thing that leads to a bloody tragedy. Throughout our entire modern history, every example of leadership that uses conspiracy theory to work has ended horribly.

Communist Russia and China said the enemy was the farmer, and then they starved.

Uganda said it was the Indian shop keepers. Then they lost nearly their entire economy when they expelled them.

Hitler was well, fucking Hitler.

It goes on and on. This though is how it starts.

If you are not shitting your pants, you should be. Our president doesn't believe he runs the government, and wishes to hold people accountable for that. This is fucking insane.
[SFW] [politics] [+8 WTF]
[by kylemcbitch@5:41amGMT]


5th Earth said @ 6:27am GMT on 5th Dec
I'm not saying it will be pleasant but I don't think the sky is falling. We made it through the Red Scare, and communists actually existed.
kylemcbitch said[1] @ 8:38am GMT on 5th Dec [Score:2 Underrated]
That's just it. The communist DID exist. So that paranoid fear had an outlet.

Compare that to the fear that Indians in Uganda were controlling the economy (they weren't.)
Compare that to the fear that Jews controlled Germany and Europe (they didn't.)
Compare that to the idea that the farmers were hiding food and thus counter revolutionaries (they weren't.)
Compare that to the idea that the Tutsis (sp?) were trying to seize power. (they were not, at least not in Rwanda.)

When it comes to the Red Scare, most of it was crap but there really were spy games going on, and the "enemy" had nukes which tempered our response.

None of that exist in this scenario.
eggboy said @ 6:58am GMT on 5th Dec
He's really pushing the envelope on seeing what congress will tolerate ay, it's kind of eye opening on just how spineless and ethically bankrupt they actually are.
lilmookieesquire said @ 7:58am GMT on 5th Dec
Being spineless and ethically bankrupt is kind of their MO.
gma said @ 8:19am GMT on 5th Dec
I'd be interested to see if any other media outlets can corroborate this, because honestly the presence of Oliver North makes this sound too absurd even for Trump.

What better way to bring credibility to an off-the-books operation than to include a guy who very famously got caught running an illegal off-the-books operation?
kylemcbitch said @ 8:44am GMT on 5th Dec
I will keep an eye out, but so far the Intercept hasn't lead me wrong. They do have apparently horrible security when it comes to protecting their sources (Reality Winner) but they haven't peddled any B.S that I know of.

Still, I can respect that and if another source carries this I will let you know.
kylemcbitch said @ 6:57pm GMT on 5th Dec
HoZay said @ 6:46am GMT on 6th Dec
In the world of Fox News, Oliver North has been rehabilitated and is a Respected Authority on military, security, and foreign affairs matters. Also, of course, he's a known Reagan Superpatriot Hero.
C18H27NO3 said @ 8:08pm GMT on 6th Dec [Score:1 Funsightful]
I do not recall that.
gendo666 said @ 8:30am GMT on 5th Dec
Another move towards a Cyberpunk version of the last days of Rome.
First the "Praetorian Guard "
Soon corporate firefights in the streets all sanctioned and legal as they are "bodyguards" protecting the "Person" of the corporation.
Inter-State weapon carrying reciprocity allowing Ex-con Corp solidats to do deep strikes into hostile Corps in other States.

Well and all that slaughter of hibernating animals.

ooo[......7 said @ 10:43am GMT on 5th Dec
"time to buy a gun"

Exactly how many hours do you have shooting? If its less than 30 you aren't prepared to do much good with a gun.
kylemcbitch said[1] @ 10:55am GMT on 5th Dec
I am not planning to go shoot people willy nilly. I do have family in law enforcement and the military, so I am not exactly without help in this regard. Basically, I am saying this is a very troubling sign that historic example does not lead to good places.

If that is what is going to happen, I should probably use this time to learn how to properly use and keep a gun. I sincerely hope I don't have to use it, the idea of getting one at all is rather distasteful to me.
ooo[......7 said @ 11:05am GMT on 5th Dec [Score:4 Underrated]
Then don't. Please.

The world doesn't need another person gunning up because they are scared. What the world needs now is love, sweet love.

Will Young - What The World Needs Now Is Love (WWF Campaign)
cb361 said @ 9:31pm GMT on 5th Dec [Score:1 Funsightful]
I am not planning to go shoot people willy nilly.

It doesn't sound as though your heart is really in owning a gun.
kylemcbitch said @ 9:36pm GMT on 5th Dec
Because it's not. I dislike the very idea of owning a gun, as it represents a serious loss of good faith in my own government. I think of them as little more than tools of violence.

Hopefully, I will not have to act on this, but that depends on where this story goes from here.
C18H27NO3 said @ 11:41pm GMT on 5th Dec
I'm going to leave the country if nothing happens to combat this disorder that is turning this country into russia. Fuck this.
BUGGERLUGS123 said @ 4:35pm GMT on 5th Dec
Trump see's anyone who does not agree with him as an enemy. He does not trust the CIA or FBI because they both distrust him because he spouts so many lies and does not know when to keep his big trout mouth shut. If he could be of use to them, they'd probably make good use of him, unfortunately he is of no use to any U.S. agency due to his personal failings and unlimited all consuming ego.

The president is not only an idiot, but a dangerous one at that.

He obviously feels very much like Kim Jong Ill, backed into a corner but unable to "take out" those who damage his image. With a private spy agency he can have them kill whoever he likes.

Very scary indeed.

I don't know which is worst, starting world war 3 or just killing off those who show him for what he really is.
C18H27NO3 said @ 11:39pm GMT on 5th Dec
I don't think this is all dumpster. I think the GOP wants to give the president more power. As much as we like to say dumpster is acting independently, he's not. He doesn't have the experience in government to know how to find loopholes and side step the constitution/ government protocol. He has help. Help in making the office of the POTUS a dictatorial position. The GOP has long complained that there is too much "checks and balances." This is just another attempt at dissolving that system.
bbqkink said @ 6:14pm GMT on 5th Dec
bbqkink said @ 7:54pm GMT on 5th Dec
Alabama poll: Jones leads Moore by 4 points

The poll was conducted from Dec. 1 to Dec. 3 among 1,276 voters likely to vote in the Dec. 12 election. It was conducted by Gravis Marketing, a Florida-based company.

Have no idea what their Likely Voter is. Have seen a few polls all of them have it close...I know it's cliche but it all depends on Turnout...Black turnout to be precise...It is estimated that a 25% black turn out wins it for the Dem....seems like a low bar...but if history is any indicator (Remember Ferguson) it isn't.
kylemcbitch said @ 8:17pm GMT on 5th Dec
I have extremely little faith in the decency of Alabamans. I have some faith in a strong black vote, but I can also tell you that black folk in that part of the south are just as whack-a-do religious as Moore and his ilk. I think Jones' history as a civil rights warrior will carry him with them, but I do suspect that many, many people will be staying home because of the conflict between faith and social justice.
bbqkink said @ 8:34pm GMT on 5th Dec
Pretty close to the way I see it. A smaller turnout and a 1 point or less win...for who Not a clue.
bbqkink said[2] @ 8:34pm GMT on 5th Dec
The White House is reportedly looking at a proposal to create a ghost network of private spies in hostile countries — a way of bypassing the intelligence community’s “deep state,” which Donald Trump believes is a threat to his administration.

Erik Prince has been pushing his private army/spy network all over the world. Trump want's to use it as a way around the CIA and all of that oversight mess.
cb361 said[1] @ 9:21pm GMT on 5th Dec
Hitler was fucking Hitler.

Is this some Nazi time-travel Hitler-cloning conspiracy?
mechanical contrivance said @ 9:56pm GMT on 5th Dec [Score:1 Funny]
Nothing so complicated. The man liked dildos.
kylemcbitch said @ 10:18pm GMT on 5th Dec
Damn it, it took this joke for me to get cb's initial joke.
hellboy said @ 11:01pm GMT on 5th Dec
He's a very dry wit.
kylemcbitch said @ 9:24pm GMT on 5th Dec
No, just saying I doubt I need to explain the conspiracies Hitler used?
Ussmak said @ 11:44pm GMT on 5th Dec
This shit always sounds scarier than it actually is. Trump wants personal informants the same way every administration does. Most are just smarter about keeping it on the down low. If anything he should be criticized for not doing it sooner and/or given a small amount of credit for the transparency.

When he says he wants his own private police force for enforcing his spies will, then you can start advocating for extreme action.

kylemcbitch said @ 12:09am GMT on 6th Dec
Other than Ronald Reagan, can you prove to me that any other administration as put forth a plan for spies in private employ, outside of the normal chain of command in the DOJ?

The fact of the matter is, the stated reason for this is to chase down a conspiracy that says the President isn't the President, as well as extraordinary rendition across the world.

Sorry if I don't take your "it's nothing" stance.
Ussmak said @ 1:03am GMT on 6th Dec
They don't submit a plan. They just do it.

Trump's actually being transparent about this, but once again, as is the party line, you default to Nazism comparisons.

Also it doesn't help that this entire article is nothing but hearsay no different than when Alex Jones claims he got insider information from his own CIA sources, so just relax.

kylemcbitch said @ 1:06am GMT on 6th Dec [Score:1 Underrated]
Okay, so you are taking the stance that you believe something without proof.

Allow me to tell you my stance on that: That which can be claimed without evidence, can be refuted without evidence.

I did tell you I was a rationalist sceptic in the main post.
Ussmak said[1] @ 1:12am GMT on 6th Dec
Says the guy presenting a clickbait article built on hearsay as proof positive of an upcoming coup, and that said article is enough impetus for you to buy a weapon you don't want, for a fight in which you're untrained.
kylemcbitch said[1] @ 1:15am GMT on 6th Dec
I did not say it was proof anything, actually. I presented the report, said why I think this is deeply concerning, and that I would buy a gun if this proceeded.

Could you quote me?

Edit: As for the Intercept being click bait, I will have to point to the fact they are the one that broke the Russian hacking into voting systems. You recall the Reality Winner story? That was an Intercept report.
Ussmak said @ 1:18am GMT on 6th Dec
"Okay, so this is one of those "time to buy a gun" moments for me. I am a rationalist sceptic. As such, I am a total cunt you never want to debate with. However, one aspect of this is that I am fundamentally opposed to conspiracy theory."

You contradict yourself with your very first statements.
kylemcbitch said @ 1:23am GMT on 6th Dec
Uh huh, so where in that quote do I say "I am going to buy a gun because this is happening?"

I said it's a moment for me, where I consider such a thing.

That is not in any way a statement that I believe something without proof. That is a statement that when confronted with a report of this nature, I think on how I will react to it. What remains to be seen, is if this is a plan that is moving forward or not.
Ussmak said @ 1:31am GMT on 6th Dec
Yeah, keep on back pedaling all you want, your intention was clear. You're convinced the President is the next Hitler, and you want to see violent resistance against him. Violence you're unwilling to undertake yourself once presented with a 'put your money where your mouth is' retort.

You're not a cunt to debate with, you're just a cunt.
kylemcbitch said @ 1:36am GMT on 6th Dec
I am not back peddling, you assumed a meaning that wasn't there. I have not edited what I said in the slightest. It remains there to be seen by all, and nowhere in it is a statement of it's factuality.

I guess what I am saying is, don't blame me for your poor reading comprehension.

As far as my feelings on Trump vis-a-vis Hitler? Sure. I can easily cop to that, because I do in fact believe Trump is a fascist, sexist, and racist. Should something like this come to pass, believe me, I will be making good on my statement of this being the impetus for gun ownership. In fact, before this very conversation, right here in these very comments, I make it clear I am not buying a gun yet.

That is also not edited, and fully in view for anyone that wishes to see it.

Got anything else? Cause I'd really like to talk to you about both praising the administration for doing this in the open, and then backtracking to say it's not happening at all.
kylemcbitch said[1] @ 2:35am GMT on 6th Dec
Am I hearing crickets Ussmak?
kylemcbitch said @ 1:27am GMT on 6th Dec
Know how I know you're disingenuous?

You are praising Trump for being transparent about it, while simultaneously claiming it's not happening.
Ussmak said @ 1:23am GMT on 6th Dec
Sorry bro, but HBO broke the fact electronic voting systems are insecure as fuck way back in 2006.

Funny how it wasn't considered a pertinent issue until Hillary lost for a second time.
kylemcbitch said @ 1:24am GMT on 6th Dec

I don't think you could have missed that point any harder if you tried.
rhesusmonkey said @ 3:14pm GMT on 6th Dec
there is a difference between "these machines are inherently insecure" and "a foreign government is actively trying to infiltrate these insecure machines." if you have an example where the latter was brought up in 2008 or 2012 i'd be happy to read it.

Given the admonition from Facebook, Google, et al. there is clear trail that targeted advertising was used to drive a specific voting agenda, and those ads were paid for by a foreign national. what's unclear still is if a)that's even illegal, or b) that the Trump campaign team knew about it and did nothing (which, again i'm not sure is illegal). Trump won the Electoral College vote, he lost the popular vote, and there are a few states that were very close that drove the EC outcome. A recount did not change the fact, and there is insufficient data to consider how a disinformation campaign affected voter turnout in those areas, and/or if any active intrusion caused ballots to be mis-counted, or station rolls to be changed thus rejecting valid individuals from voting at all.

what i'm most concerned with on this whole investigation is that there may be a trail for something "shady" but not illegal.
Fish said @ 11:45am GMT on 5th Dec [Score:-5 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings