Archaeologica.org

WikiLeaks Supporters' Twitter Accounts Subpoenaed

The US Justice Department has served Twitter with a subpoena for the personal information and private messages of WikiLeaks supporters. There's a copy of the subpoena here (PDF); boing boing has a detailed article. Twitter has 3 days to turn over the information.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... bpoena.pdf

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/01/07/re ... oenas.html

See the pattern?
The yellow assholes are going after little guys, individuals. Pressurizing, intimidating, and terrorising them with the full might of the nation state and the law, and the prospect of at least a decade in court, if not imprisoned without trial, and millions of dollars of legal fees.
Instead of going after the BIG guys, like The New York Times, Washington Post, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, etc. Why? Because the BIG guys' lawyers would laugh the prosecuting attorney out of court waving the US Constitution. And countersue them to hell and back.

So they prefer to crush little people. Very effective in the acronyms' efforts to terrorise the populace into obedience and through hoops.
Formally approved destruction of individuals. Without an independent, public court case or verdict!
"Fascism" anyone?

Serve 'em right IMO. Just over grown village gossips.
How would you feel if someone posted your private E-Mails to the world, hacked off no doubt?
If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Roy.

Digit wrote:Serve 'em right IMO. Just over grown village gossips.
How would you feel if someone posted your private E-Mails to the world, hacked off no doubt?

If they are "just over grown village gossips", what is the administration apparently so worried about? How come they react as if stung by a hornet?
Because they are! It hurts! Because it is dead on target!

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Got more of those paternalistic fascistoid mottos?

Got more of those paternalistic fascistoid mottos?

Plenty, but that's hardly the point is it?
In your country you have data protection laws, privacy laws and it is an offence to interfere with the mail, which is why I asked how you would feel if you were the victim.
Do you doubt that your ambassador to the States passed on his opinion to your government about Obama? That he did it privately to help your officials talk/negoiate as effectively as possible with the US administration?
If not, what was he there for?

Roy.

Digit wrote:In your country you have data protection laws, privacy laws and it is an offence to interfere with the mail, which is why I asked how you would feel if you were the victim.

Apples & pears again:
I am an individual, with privacy rights.
The senders of those cables are, collectively, the government: a) not an individual, b) supposed to be open and accountable to the people they are supposed to serve.
Since they aren't (open and accountable to the people they are supposed to serve), unconventional MOs to obtain insight in what they really do automatically come into play. Regardless of whether we like it or not. It's a waterbed effect.

The movements and propagators behind every major shift in societal (power) structures, attitudes, politics, and relations – throughout history – were invariably deemed 'illegal' and/or 'immoral' until they eventually became mainstream anyway.
But up to that point they were, also invariably, ridiculed, ostracised, prosecuted, intimidated, blackmailed, bankrupted, jailed, dismembered, burnt at the stake, and, generally, crushed. By the authorities.
It takes brass balls to take on authorities if you have prospects like that.
Unfortunately most people only have rubber spines.

Do you doubt that your ambassador to the States passed on his opinion to your government about Obama?

Of course not, that's his job. So he did.
But it is the tone-of-voice in those 'cables', the language used, that makes the difference. "C'est le ton qui fait la musique", as our French friends are fond of saying. Which now, because it is becoming public – verbatim! – is revealing what the authors, the government, really thinks, plans and does. And the illegality and immorality of those thoughts, plans, and operations.
And it ain't a pretty picture.

Reconfirmed by this attacking and terrorising of individuals, little people, patsies, while studiously 'ignoring' the BIG targets out there.
Smoke & mirrors. Misdirection. It's an old song & dance routine.

The diagnosis?
Well, sofar it's even worse than we thought, doctor. The vital signs are fading and that is ominous. We'd like to do a full work-up of tests. Then isolate, irradiate, poison, and physically cut out every single cancer. And then hope and pray that we haven't killed the patient doing it. Pull out all the stops if we want to get a sliver of a chance of survivability.

Is there a choice?

So your point is the tone of voice rather than the fact? Again, till we see what your ambassador writes I feel that that is rather a mute point my friend.

Roy.

Digit wrote:So your point is the tone of voice rather than the fact?

No, that's not what I said. I said: "But it is the tone-of-voice in those 'cables', the language used, that makes the difference." I.o.w. it is the content (obviously) PLUS the tone/verbiage that matters.

Again, till we see what your ambassador writes I feel that that is rather a mute point my friend.

The fact that those 'cables' have not been published/leaked yet is probably because they are not interesting. And why aren't they interesting? Because the (our) ambassador used decent, carefully chosen language (as befits professional, decent diplomats). Unlike others we could mention.

Or more likely the States is the 'enemy' as for many in Europe.
As for the idea that Dutch ambassadors are any different from others is, I suspect, wishful thinking!
Let's face it, our 'President' was described as a 'clown'. By his sister!

Roy.

Digit wrote:Or more likely the States is the 'enemy' as for many in Europe.

Yep, we're waking up.

As for the idea that Dutch ambassadors are any different from others is, I suspect, wishful thinking!

Perhaps. We'll see. Or we won't. But in any case the language in cables from Dutch officials, sofar, has not created all the upheaval! The language in cables from US officials has!

Let's face it, our 'President' was described as a 'clown'. By his sister!

The fact that you refer to our 'President', a Freudian slip of the tongue no doubt, sadly speaks volumes of the UK's dependency on their big cousin.

Yep, we're waking up.

Nope! I'm learning how bigoted people are.
The word president was in inverted commas, and she still described his as a clown.
Very diplomatic!

Roy.

Digit wrote:The word president was in inverted commas

The word 'our' wasn't...



So maybe your language was diplomatic, but it was far from sovereign!

True, but my point was he ain't much use as a a pressy!

Roy.

Digit wrote:True, but my point was he ain't much use as a a pressy!

I wish it were as innocent as that. But it isn't IRL.
IRL American presidents arrogantly fuck the world up!

And the EU wouldn't?
Power corrupts.....

Roy.

Digit wrote:And the EU wouldn't?

We Europeans, the UK included of course, have already fucked it up in the 18th, 19th and first half of the 20th century. The US have taken over that baton since and are trying hard to do even more damage by throwing their weight around. But they have bitten off more than they can chew, and are already choking on it.
Asia is next.

Power corrupts.....

And absolute power corrupts absolutely.