Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Knight to queen's bishop 3 - Snowden charged with espionage.
40hz:
Interesting article posted on Lawfare regarding Snowden and some reasoned speculation on how the Russian game strategy appears to be changing...
Is Putin Selling Out Edward Snowden?
By Benjamin Wittes
Thursday, July 31, 2014 at 5:24 PM
This is rank, arguably irresponsible, speculation. I have had no—that is to say zero—conversations with anyone who knows anything about Snowden’s status in Russia. I can thus offer no particularly good reason to believe that Vladimir Putin is getting ready to rid himself of Edward Snowden.
But would you take four bad reasons? When you put them all together, I think there’s enough there to make you wonder what’s going on behind the scenes.
...
--- End quote ---
Are we heading for the endgame?
Read the full article here.
Renegade:
Are we heading for the endgame?
Read the full article here.
-40hz (August 02, 2014, 04:09 PM)
--- End quote ---
I don't know what to make of that. Lawfare is associated with The Brookings Institute -- the same think tank that put together "Which Path to Persia", which is a plan to invade Iran. They're associated through the grape vine with Zbigniew Brzezinski. The list goes on and on.
So, which strand of the spider's web is "Lawfare"? Are we being given an accurate prediction? Is this misdirection? Or perhaps just a regular contributor speculating off-the-cuff?
His reasoning in the article makes sense though. Not sure what to make of all of it.
40hz:
So, which strand of the spider's web is "Lawfare"? Are we being given an accurate prediction? Is this misdirection? Or perhaps just a regular contributor speculating off-the-cuff?
-Renegade (August 02, 2014, 09:24 PM)
--- End quote ---
@Ren - You do have a predilection for dividing by zero do'n’t you? as Lewis Carrol might put it. :huh:
Once you go down that rabbit hole of self-referential accusations and 'proofs' you might as well ask which strand of "the spider's web" 40hz represents for merely posting such a link? (Since there's every chance he didn't "merely" post it.) :P
FWIW, regardless of which side of the political spectrum somebody comes down on, most people don't talk about things without some sort of agenda (i.e. to get you to agree with them, believe them, do something, don't do something, like the person who's speaking, etc.). ;)
Renegade:
Once you go down that rabbit hole of self-referential accusations and 'proofs' you might as well ask which strand of "the spider's web" 40hz represents for merely posting such a link? (Since there's every chance he didn't "merely" post it.) :P
-40hz (August 03, 2014, 07:27 AM)
--- End quote ---
Compartmentalisation.
You can't really believe that think tanks sponsor organisations with no agenda. That's what they do.
And a think tank like Brookings?
While it may sound paranoid, when you start looking in closer detail, there are clear connections.
The same names of the same people keep coming up again and again. (Which is why I mentioned Zbigniew Brzezinski as he keeps popping up all over.)
There are clear connections between Brookings and other organisations and individuals. Denying that is just silly as they are established facts. Asking about what Brookings expects from its investment in Lawfare is a legitimate question.
Asking about consumers though... that's a bit of a stretch. What I can see there is:
A) 40hz reads Lawfare
B) 40hz reads Popehat
C) Both Lawfare & Popehat are legal blogs/web sites
D) 40hz probably enjoys reading legal blogs/web sites
And, as a bonus:
E) 40hz probably enjoys SCOTUS blog & Courthouse News (or would if he doesn't already)
D & E are reasonable assumptions, but certainly not guaranteed.
What would be a stretch there is to assume that you like BCND or Cop Block or PINAC because the nature of those deviates significantly from Popehat & Lawfare.
However, with established relationships like with Brookings & Lawfare, it's certainly reasonable to assume that Lawfare gets people aligned with its vision (which is supported by Brookings) to post articles. There *IS* a relationship there.
Now, whether the article is significant there, I don't know, as I pointed out above.
I'm not dividing by zero. I'm simply looking at the obvious relationships and wondering what is going on and what the motivations are.
What would be silly is asking what established relationships Mark Potok has to Brookings in this context. I wouldn't rule out that there is a relationship because there are a lot of incestuous relationships between think tanks & organisations like that which Mark Potok speaks for. But in this context, it makes no sense.
There are some interesting questions raised by other whistle blowers and geo-political analysts about Edward Snowden. (I'm relatively certain that very few people here have heard any of their questions. I know there is at least 1 person here who might have heard their line of questions.)
I raise some of the questions I have above because this is indeed a very complicated spider's web of treachery, deceit, and treason. There is a conspiracy going on here. It's not a theory. We have facts & documentation of it now.
Many whistle blowers in the past have brought up exactly what Snowden has proved so far. So, is this new information? No. Not at all. The only difference now is our confidence in that information.
We have yet to see any really big revelations come out of the Snowden leaks. That's going to piss off some people, but that's how it is.
William (Bill) Binney - worth looking into.
Sibel Edmonds - worth looking into.
Snowden is just one piece on the board. Pawn? Knight? Bishop? He had a blistering hot girl friend, so we know he wasn't a Queen. :P
But no matter what, he's rooked! :P
40hz:
While it may sound paranoid, when you start looking in closer detail, there are clear connections.
-Renegade (August 03, 2014, 09:59 AM)
--- End quote ---
It still sounds fairly paranoid to me. These guys are nowhere near that good - and they're certainly not very subtle if that's truly the case. (That's probably not a bad thing when all factors in this scenario are taken into consideration however.) :)
Asking about what Brookings expects from its investment in Lawfare is a legitimate question.
Asking about consumers though... that's a bit of a stretch. What I can see there is:
A) 40hz reads Lawfare
B) 40hz reads Popehat
C) Both Lawfare & Popehat are legal blogs/web sites
D) 40hz probably enjoys reading legal blogs/web sites
And, as a bonus:
E) 40hz probably enjoys SCOTUS blog & Courthouse News (or would if he doesn't already)
D & E are reasonable assumptions, but certainly not guaranteed.
-Renegade (August 03, 2014, 09:59 AM)
--- End quote ---
Lets see how well you did: ;D
a) 40hz very occasionally reads Lawfare. Maybe once or twice a month he gives it a skim.
b) 40hz religiously reads Popehat. Mostly because he can see a time where he might need to appeal to them for a Popehat signal.
c) Good conclusion. Obvious. But valid.
d) Not particularly. But I do like Popehat because I have a peculiar like-hate thing about Ken White. Mostly it's like insofar as it's questionably possible to like an attorney.
e) I generally prefer to read the actual SC decisions rather than try to follow the court watcher and judicial fanboy blogs when it comes to the Dangerous Nine. One thing I've learned about the Supreme Court over the years - don't ever attempt to predict or second guess how they'll rule. That way madness lies. Something I learned as a sophomore in high school thanks to an absolutely brilliant American History teacher (an practicing attorney) who had us look at US history through the lens of significan legislation and court rulings. We used to be presented with a case case, have to write an opinion over the weekend, and then read the SC's actual decision on Monday - at which point we'd discuss it. This teacher's attitude was that the United States was nothing more than a diverse group of people living under a set of written laws. And to truly understand the forces that shaped the nation, you'd needed to be aware of the role of the courts and how judical interpretation (and its evolution) directed and shaped what this country was and did over the years.
I've followed the SC ever since. And from what I can see, this instructor was right.
I'm not dividing by zero. I'm simply looking at the obvious relationships and wondering what is going on and what the motivations are.
--- End quote ---
Oh, that's easy enough.
You have a large number of well-connected and powerful people (along with a fair number of the general public) that like things pretty much the way they are who are willing to take steps necessary to preserve the current status quo and (ideally) enhance their position in it.
That's not a conspiracy per se. That's just people teaming, and ganging up, to push through their own agenda. In some cases, cheating when it's felt it's necessary. That's what people do. Always have. Always will.
But no matter what, he's rooked!
--- End quote ---
Pretty much. Which just goes to show nobody in ANY government or institution likes a tattler. No matter what they tell you. Because all institutions have dirty laundry. ANd whenever people in positions of autority in such institutions see somebody like Snowden, they can't help but think "There but for the grace of God (and a healthy dose of threatening those who would tell tales), go we."
;) ;D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version