The US doing bad things has no bearing on Russia doing bad things.
Not quite true in this field. If the US is spreading disinformation about Russia and Russia simply sits back and takes it then there will be an asymmetry.
Tu quoque only fully applies when the parties in question are not in direct conflict with each other. When that is the case then it is necessary to delve back into the history of how the conflict began and developed before one can come to any judgement.
I note that this first post has been trashed by subsequent commenters and hidden - however the statement "Our president and his cabinet lie directly to the American people... as does our congress and judges." would probably have been marked insightful had it appeared as a comment on a post on almost any other subject.
Look at the following stories - very quyickly found by Googling "President Lied Techdirt":
Take a country whose economy is in shambles, people feel persecuted by their former enemies, military is still strong, and a strong, unapologetic leader trying desperately to restore the nation's pride and dominance and what do you get? Nazi Germany, that's what.
The economy is not such a shambles as you suggest. I visited 2 years ago and have friends who go back and forth on a regualr basis and I can tell you that that part of your preamble is not true. It was true in the 1990s - under Yeltsin (the first time I visited) - and Putin's reversal of the economic fortunes is the main reason for his popularity. There has been a bit of a reverse since the fall in the oil price - but it has a long way to go to fall back to the dark days of the mid 90s.
The rest of what you presume is more or less right - but Russia is not Germany and so the result will not be what you say. The nearest thing to Nazism in the region is the Ukrainian government that the US supports.
For purposes of this Article, software subject to paragraph 1 is limited to mass-market software, and does not include software used for critical infrastructure.
But - EVERYTHING that a government does can be defined to be critical infrastructure - end of problem.
If also if the government excludes "mass market software" from a specification then that also solves the problem.
Are you really saying that stopping "trying to continually humiliate Russia and/or trying to force it to be like us ". is not an option?
It is precisely because we fail to do this that we are risking returning to the cold war.
I repeat - we have got so used to the idea of Russia as the enemy that we couldn't let go of it and after 20 years or so Russia has shrugged its shoulders and set - "well if you really want it that way then we can go back to that as well."
A few months ago the descendants of the "first emigration", Russians who left in the 1920s after the revolution and have lived in the west ever since wrote the following
“The aggressive hostility that Russia faces now lacks any rationality and the double standard policy simply exceeds all limits. They accuse Russia of all sorts of crimes, they pronounce it guilty a priori and without any evidence, whilst they show other countries surprising leniency, in particular, where human rights are concerned. We can’t put up with daily slander targeting modern Russia, its leaders and its President, who are slapped with sanctions and smeared with dirt, in contradiction to basic reason”
These people are not in any sense part of Putin's propaganda army. They fled for their lives and lost most of their property as a result of the revolution. They acknowledge that Russia has changed since soviet times - its a pitty that we don't seem to be able to.
Putin is the result of the west's attitude to Russia over the last 25 or so years. We have not been able to give up on he idea of having Russia as an enemy.
We were still trying to detach neighbouring countries from Russia during the later Yeltsin and early Putin years.
Since 1991 (possibly slightly before) there has been no ideological reason to oppose Russia - but we have continued to do so because we recruited nationalists from the non-Russian parts of the Soviet Union to our cause during the cold war and continued to listen to them after communism fell. These people (eg Brezinski) hate Russia simply for being Russia and for no other reason. Under these circumstances it is not a surprise that Russia reacts in the way that it does.
Remember that Putin is way more popular in Russia than any western politician is in his own country so it is the Russian people we are opposing these days - not just the leadership.
Until we give up on trying to continually humiliate Russia and/or trying to force it to be like us we can expect it to continue to behave in this way - and subtlety is not a part of the way they operate.
I think a better approach is to not buy meat that you don't understand.
That was really what I meant- I assumed that meat could still be labelled voluntarily and the good quality local producers would want to label theirs. However if they don't then it may be possible to get the required information by other means.
As that makes clear, alongside the fact that it is quite possible that the US will indeed modify its laws here because of a trade agreement, this would be happening even though the laws in question enjoy huge support among the US public.
I'm pretty sure that the WTO rules that the US has now fallen foul of were put in place due to US lobbying - perhaps related to the labelling of GM foods.
Monsanto is desperate to force the EU to stop labelling GM foods as such - because consumers won't buy them and it is shut out or the european market.
The US wants it both ways - force food labelling where it helps US interests - and ban it where it does the reverse.
OF course US consumers do have the means to overturn this - simply stop buying unlabelled meat. It is not harder than to stop buying Canadian or Mexican meat.
take a look at Argentina. They had some of their sovereign ships docked in the Arab Penninsula cant recall the country probably Qatar
In other words force majeur. It may have partially worked against Argentina but it wouldn't have worked against the US or Russia or China or a major European country. Look how far Antigua got against the US - even though all the WTO decisions went in their favour.
When a corporation can dangle a multi-billion dollar threat over a government's head if they pass or modify a law that might cut into the company's profits(like say expanding safety regulations), and both sides know that the 'court' that's going to be handing out that ruling is incredibly biased in favor of corporations, that gives them an insane amount of power over the government,
Unless the government simply ignores the judgement - as I am sure the US would do. After all these tribunals don't have a police force or an army to enforce their will.
Normally companies can sue governments in the courts of the country concerned and under the laws of the country. The government has the option to simply change the law if it doesn't like the result.
The new situation here is the existence of a tribunal which sits above the laws of the country and passes judgement on the laws themselves - not just the actions of the government.
Of course they key to this is that the decisions of such a tribunal are only enforceable so long as the tribunal has some leverage over the government.
The leverage would generally consist in the threat of the withdrawal of other benefits of the treaty. Generally this would take the form of trade based retaliation by other parties to the treaty.
In the absence of suchg leverage, when a country has withdrawn from the treaty, then it is not clear whether these clauses are enforceable. In fact it is unclear whether thease clauses would ever be enforceable against a country like the US, after all the US routinely ignores judgements of the WTO. In practice these clauses will genrally be used by the US against smaller less powerful countries or as an excuse by politicians for not listening to public opinion.
This latter is probably the biggest problem for people in big powerful countries/blocs like the US, EU, China etc
. But there’s a caveat: parliament can’t make a law that would bind future parliaments.
. But there’s a caveat: parliament can’t make a law that would bind future parliaments.
It follows that parliament cannot ratify this treaty. If it does then the ratification is null and void.
There is nothing to stop the UK simply ignoring the huffing and puffing of the tribunals. These 10 year/20 year extensions are meaningless since once you have withdrawn from a treaty then you have abandoned its "benefits" and hence the tribunal has no leverage over you.
What do you think Vladimir Putin would do in that situation??
Subjecting either group of people to arrest seems ridiculous to me.
Because it is ridiculous. It doesn't happen in traditional sports/games - even when big money is involved. Things that happen within the game stay within the game - and the manufacturers of equipment that enables cheating are not prosecuted.
He definitely cheated, has admitted it and big money was involved.
Now sports stars who "throw" matches when bribed by gamblers are rightly imprisoned but cheating witihin the game is always punished within the game (if at all) unless it is actually physically dangerous.
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re: tu quoque
Not quite true in this field. If the US is spreading disinformation about Russia and Russia simply sits back and takes it then there will be an asymmetry.
Tu quoque only fully applies when the parties in question are not in direct conflict with each other. When that is the case then it is necessary to delve back into the history of how the conflict began and developed before one can come to any judgement.
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re: Re:
I note that this first post has been trashed by subsequent commenters and hidden - however the statement "Our president and his cabinet lie directly to the American people... as does our congress and judges." would probably have been marked insightful had it appeared as a comment on a post on almost any other subject.
Look at the following stories - very quyickly found by Googling "President Lied Techdirt":
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130819/01541724227/down-to-just-few-possibilities-pres ident-obama-either-lied-is-ignorant-about-nsa.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150424/144432 30784/president-obama-demands-critics-tell-him-whats-wrong-with-tpp-course-we-cant-do-that-because-h e-wont-show-us-agreement.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130701/12494623683/james-clapper-a dmits-he-lied-to-congress-even-his-excuse-is-misleading.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131 231/17140325732/stop-letting-nsas-defenders-lie-there-have-been-many-significant-abuses.shtml
and many many more.
If you all think that the US government machine lies consistently about these other issues - why do you think it tells the truth about Russia?
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re: News Flash
The economy is not such a shambles as you suggest. I visited 2 years ago and have friends who go back and forth on a regualr basis and I can tell you that that part of your preamble is not true. It was true in the 1990s - under Yeltsin (the first time I visited) - and Putin's reversal of the economic fortunes is the main reason for his popularity. There has been a bit of a reverse since the fall in the oil price - but it has a long way to go to fall back to the dark days of the mid 90s.
The rest of what you presume is more or less right - but Russia is not Germany and so the result will not be what you say. The nearest thing to Nazism in the region is the Ukrainian government that the US supports.
On the post: TISA Agreement Might Outlaw Governments From Mandating Open Source Software In Many Situations
Everything
But - EVERYTHING that a government does can be defined to be critical infrastructure - end of problem.
If also if the government excludes "mass market software" from a specification then that also solves the problem.
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re: Re: Putin is the result
Are you really saying that stopping "trying to continually humiliate Russia and/or trying to force it to be like us ".
is not an option?
It is precisely because we fail to do this that we are risking returning to the cold war.
I repeat - we have got so used to the idea of Russia as the enemy that we couldn't let go of it and after 20 years or so Russia has shrugged its shoulders and set - "well if you really want it that way then we can go back to that as well."
A few months ago the descendants of the "first emigration", Russians who left in the 1920s after the revolution and have lived in the west ever since wrote the following
These people are not in any sense part of Putin's propaganda army. They fled for their lives and lost most of their property as a result of the revolution. They acknowledge that Russia has changed since soviet times - its a pitty that we don't seem to be able to.
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Putin is the result
We were still trying to detach neighbouring countries from Russia during the later Yeltsin and early Putin years.
Since 1991 (possibly slightly before) there has been no ideological reason to oppose Russia - but we have continued to do so because we recruited nationalists from the non-Russian parts of the Soviet Union to our cause during the cold war and continued to listen to them after communism fell. These people (eg Brezinski) hate Russia simply for being Russia and for no other reason. Under these circumstances it is not a surprise that Russia reacts in the way that it does.
Remember that Putin is way more popular in Russia than any western politician is in his own country so it is the Russian people we are opposing these days - not just the leadership.
Until we give up on trying to continually humiliate Russia and/or trying to force it to be like us we can expect it to continue to behave in this way - and subtlety is not a part of the way they operate.
On the post: NSA Personnel: Search For Needles Not Being Helped By Continual Addition Of Hay To The Stacks
We should ask ourselves
That is the root of the problem. So long as you believe that then "collect it all" seems justified as the only way to go.
On the post: Court Shuts Down NYPD's Argument That When Searching For Black Male Suspects, Any Black Male Will Do
Re: Re:
Not so this time - I think the AC below( May 28th, 2015 @ 9:59am) has beaten you!
On the post: Even Before TPP And TTIP, US Already Being Forced To Change Laws By Trade Agreements
Re: Re: Re: US has only itself to blame
That was really what I meant- I assumed that meat could still be labelled voluntarily and the good quality local producers would want to label theirs. However if they don't then it may be possible to get the required information by other means.
On the post: An Innocent Pressure Cooker Pays The Price In The War On Terror
Being a member of US Law Enforcement
On the post: Even Before TPP And TTIP, US Already Being Forced To Change Laws By Trade Agreements
US has only itself to blame
I'm pretty sure that the WTO rules that the US has now fallen foul of were put in place due to US lobbying - perhaps related to the labelling of GM foods.
Monsanto is desperate to force the EU to stop labelling GM foods as such - because consumers won't buy them and it is shut out or the european market.
The US wants it both ways - force food labelling where it helps US interests - and ban it where it does the reverse.
OF course US consumers do have the means to overturn this - simply stop buying unlabelled meat. It is not harder than to stop buying Canadian or Mexican meat.
On the post: Court Shuts Down NYPD's Argument That When Searching For Black Male Suspects, Any Black Male Will Do
Have they never seen..
On the post: How Corporate Sovereignty Undermines Democracy By Irrevocably Binding Future Governments
Re: Re: Re: Re: What IS "corporate sovereignty"?
In other words force majeur. It may have partially worked against Argentina but it wouldn't have worked against the US or Russia or China or a major European country.
Look how far Antigua got against the US - even though all the WTO decisions went in their favour.
On the post: How Corporate Sovereignty Undermines Democracy By Irrevocably Binding Future Governments
Re: Re: Re: Re: What IS "corporate sovereignty"?
In other words exactly the same trade war you could have had without ever having the treaty in the first place.
AND of course it won't work if the treaty breaker is the US.
On the post: How Corporate Sovereignty Undermines Democracy By Irrevocably Binding Future Governments
Re: Re: Re: What IS "corporate sovereignty"?
Until the corporations have armies they are going to have trouble with that.
On the post: How Corporate Sovereignty Undermines Democracy By Irrevocably Binding Future Governments
Re: Re: What IS "corporate sovereignty"?
Unless the government simply ignores the judgement - as I am sure the US would do.
After all these tribunals don't have a police force or an army to enforce their will.
On the post: How Corporate Sovereignty Undermines Democracy By Irrevocably Binding Future Governments
Re: What IS "corporate sovereignty"?
Normally companies can sue governments in the courts of the country concerned and under the laws of the country. The government has the option to simply change the law if it doesn't like the result.
The new situation here is the existence of a tribunal which sits above the laws of the country and passes judgement on the laws themselves - not just the actions of the government.
Of course they key to this is that the decisions of such a tribunal are only enforceable so long as the tribunal has some leverage over the government.
The leverage would generally consist in the threat of the withdrawal of other benefits of the treaty. Generally this would take the form of trade based retaliation by other parties to the treaty.
In the absence of suchg leverage, when a country has withdrawn from the treaty, then it is not clear whether these clauses are enforceable. In fact it is unclear whether thease clauses would ever be enforceable against a country like the US, after all the US routinely ignores judgements of the WTO. In practice these clauses will genrally be used by the US against smaller less powerful countries or as an excuse by politicians for not listening to public opinion.
This latter is probably the biggest problem for people in big powerful countries/blocs like the US, EU, China etc
On the post: How Corporate Sovereignty Undermines Democracy By Irrevocably Binding Future Governments
. But there’s a caveat: parliament can’t make a law that would bind future parliaments.
It follows that parliament cannot ratify this treaty. If it does then the ratification is null and void.
There is nothing to stop the UK simply ignoring the huffing and puffing of the tribunals.
These 10 year/20 year extensions are meaningless since once you have withdrawn from a treaty then you have abandoned its "benefits" and hence the tribunal has no leverage over you.
What do you think Vladimir Putin would do in that situation??
On the post: Meanwhile, In Japan: More Arrests For Cheating At Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because it is ridiculous.
It doesn't happen in traditional sports/games - even when big money is involved. Things that happen within the game stay within the game - and the manufacturers of equipment that enables cheating are not prosecuted.
On the post: Meanwhile, In Japan: More Arrests For Cheating At Video Games
World Cup
He definitely cheated, has admitted it and big money was involved.
Now sports stars who "throw" matches when bribed by gamblers are rightly imprisoned but cheating witihin the game is always punished within the game (if at all) unless it is actually physically dangerous.
Next >>