The Intercept steps up after catching a reporter faking data and sources
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/02/a-note-to-readers/ Short version: One of their reporters was being dishonest, they caught it and fired them and have retracted one story and corrected several others. It's nice to see they're trying to be accountable and aren't hiding their mistakes (AFAIK, they caught it before anyone else did and so weren't just "getting in front of things" to preempt an outing) Kudos, Intercept.
the intercept will never fucking "step up" and fuck you for writing such propaganda On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Michael Best <themikebest@gmail.com> wrote:
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/02/a-note-to-readers/
Short version: One of their reporters was being dishonest, they caught it and fired them and have retracted one story and corrected several others.
It's nice to see they're trying to be accountable and aren't hiding their mistakes (AFAIK, they caught it before anyone else did and so weren't just "getting in front of things" to preempt an outing)
Kudos, Intercept.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:05 AM Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
the intercept will never fucking "step up" and fuck you for writing such propaganda
Cari, I've dug through my mail archives to try to figure out what it is you have against The Intercept, and while I can't claim to have closely read every hit for your name and "intercept," I have been unable to find any reason you've given for your hatred. I did see a mention of a friend in prison, which seems like it may be somehow related? I'm genuinely curious, because I don't have direct experience with anyone involved beyond their public reputations in relatively mainstream sources, so if there is a reason I should not be trusting them or Glenn Greenwald, it would be very helpful to know that. Of course, since I don't have any more reason to trust you than to trust Glenn, I'd appreciate anything you can provide that I can verify without too much effort.
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 21:10:49 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
I'm genuinely curious, because I don't have direct experience with anyone involved beyond their public reputations in relatively mainstream sources, so if there is a reason I should not be trusting them or Glenn Greenwald,
You didn't realize that the intercept is a propaganda outlet of the 'good' 'progressive' american lefties? Financed by a high ranking american corporatist, the owner of ebay*? Granted, greenwald isn't as biased as some of his employees, but he's clearly involved. Plus, greenwald and friends are the ones who allegedly have all that stuff tha snowden took from the nsa...and they never publish it. That seems like a very very big, very red flag. You don't need any inside information to see what's wrong with the intercept. *it would quite funny to have the intercept repor on how ebay spies for hte US government, something they must have been doing since day zero.
it would be very helpful to know that. Of course, since I don't have any more reason to trust you than to trust Glenn, I'd appreciate anything you can provide that I can verify without too much effort.
juan wrote:
You didn't realize that the intercept is a propaganda outlet of the 'good' 'progressive' american lefties? Financed by a high ranking american corporatist, the owner of ebay*?
Poor people in ghettos don't have the resources to make a dent in the MSM's grip on the 'Merican mind and Glenn Greenwald is NOT a part of what you refer to as "'progressive' american lefties". "Progressive American lefties" don't consort with people wanted by the federal government, they try to convince them to turn themselves in ... because "the shitstem works", but "poor people in ghettos" do. BTW, have I ever mentioned Abbie Hoffman got the money to operate the Cooper Square Free Store, where Yippie!'s plan for the Festival of Life at the '68 Chicago Democratic Police Riot was hatched/plotted/conspired from the NYC YMCA? Bonus! Ed Sander's illustrated instructions on how to exorcise and levitate the Pentagon, circa 1967: https://40.media.tumblr.com/52d19ff6c2c93cfb298f3fe1557373af/tumblr_o1zr6dfF... -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:51:08 -0800 Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
BTW, have I ever mentioned Abbie Hoffman got the money to operate the Cooper Square Free Store,
No. How did he?
where Yippie!'s plan for the Festival of Life at the '68 Chicago Democratic Police Riot was hatched/plotted/conspired from the NYC YMCA?
Bonus! Ed Sander's illustrated instructions on how to exorcise and levitate the Pentagon, circa 1967: https://40.media.tumblr.com/52d19ff6c2c93cfb298f3fe1557373af/tumblr_o1zr6dfF...
nice handwriting
juan wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:51:08 -0800 Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
BTW, have I ever mentioned Abbie Hoffman got the money to operate the Cooper Square Free Store, No. How did he?
I THINK Stew Albert might have written a grant proposal, but there were a couple of others who had the bureaucratic skills to pull it off. I simply can't find a scanned copy of his first book Revolution for the Hell of It where he recunts it. Must get a used copy, scan, torrent. On my bucketlist...
where Yippie!'s plan for the Festival of Life at the '68 Chicago Democratic Police Riot was hatched/plotted/conspired from the NYC YMCA?
Bonus! Ed Sander's illustrated instructions on how to exorcise and levitate the Pentagon, circa 1967: https://40.media.tumblr.com/52d19ff6c2c93cfb298f3fe1557373af/tumblr_o1zr6dfF...
nice handwriting
If the MPs hadn't kept breaking the circle being created around the building... Imagine how different things would have turned out eh? Maybe if Ben Morea's UAW/MF shock troop had made it more than a foot or two into the building before being repelled... Although I have the sneaking suspicion that purple cloud of Pentagon Evil would have enveloped the Earth like the "Cobalt-Thorium G" radiation from the Dr. Strangelove "Doomsday Machine", complicating matters considerably instead. It's good to have the enemy in one place, instead of scattered everywhere, as seem to be the current strategic idiocy of the US military. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_device https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_Against_the_Wall_Motherfuckers -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:51:08 -0800 Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
juan wrote:
You didn't realize that the intercept is a propaganda outlet of the 'good' 'progressive' american lefties? Financed by a high ranking american corporatist, the owner of ebay*?
Poor people in ghettos don't have the resources to make a dent in the MSM's grip on the 'Merican mind
That is not really the point. And poor and 'middle class' people can pool their resources. The point is that a capo of the american corporatist mafia like ebay owner is not going to do anything that actually hurts the interestst of the government mafia and his own. Do you need a right winger like me to tell you that? =)
and Glenn Greenwald is NOT a part of what you refer to as "'progressive' american lefties".
Well Greenwald seems to have been influenced by libertarian ideas so he must be a 'right winger'? =) On the other hand, I don't think salon.com publishes stuff from right wingers... The thing is, although greenwald is rather good when compared to the 'mainstream' journalistic mafia, the snowden affair and his colaboration with hihg ranking mafiosos look pretty much like a fiasco. J.
thanks for asking we had a big argument on the list about it at one point but maybe it was more about glenn greenwald, jeremy scahill and pierre so the intercept did not come up for you as the target my distrust is about numerous things but primary about authoritarian capitalism and the capitalist nation building of the USA pierre omidyar gave over 1 million dollars to usaid programs in the ukraine before the 'revolution' http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/01/1281233/-Pando-Pierre-Omidyar-Helpe... https://shadowproof.com/2014/02/28/things-are-getting-weird-at-first-look-me... in case you dont know - usaid is a front group for the cia - they stomp around the globe and either utilize uprising activists or create them for their own use ie authoritarian capitalism if you need to know about that whole history of the cia then i highly recommend you look into the work of naomi klein - she is an economist based out of canada - there are tones of videos on the webs of her speaking her films - she writes books but sort of puts them to film - if you need me to point you directly to information from her let me know - but there are a lot of things the cia does and has done thru various front organizations like NED etc it is kind of like the whole thing with soros that supports a lot of activism that may seem great on the surface but there are serious issues his money supports which creates more problems but this is whole huge other thing having to do with russia and other things ... caspar bowden also had criticism of soros which will explain to you the deeper issues regarding funding https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijr0E6Lw4Nk i said at the time and numerous times before i would never work for dick cheney making fly fishing lures which essentially means it is a difficulty to retain ethics while taking money from the corrupt comparmentalizing out that you personally didnt drop a bomb on a child is an argument of willful blindness of course these are not black and white issues but there are levels the ideology that the USG engages/enforces is a horror - the powers are parasitic and plant parasites in the people and if you think that is not an issue for the living then i would urge you to educate yourself +++ glenn greenwald wrote a book long ago whereby he claimed support for the iraqi invasion and afghani invasion after 9/11 stating something strange like he trusts the US authorities to be doing the right thing or some crap the profound lie of the connection to 9/11 and iraq didnt seem to be an issue for him if this wasnt enough to dissuade anyone from hailing his brain function he refuses to acknowledge this support of the invasion and apologize for it as if he never wrote such insanity +++ jeremy scahill took a selfie with a murdered body in a morgue on a slab in mogadeshu for his little film dirty wars this is unconscionable if someone thinks this is not unconscionable then they dont know enough about journalism human rights or respect for that matter he as a journalist for me is highly compromised because of his attachment to authoritarian capitalism that he engages +++ laura poitras is a capitalist i have issues as a journalist with her being embedded with the military in the iraq invasion - which interestingly jeremy scahill was not embedded as there was a huge ethics breech for journalists that agreed to the embed at least in my realm of journalism which is as an activist journalist i think they held onto the snowden files for capitalist reasons moreover especially at the beginning from the files she has produced articles out of german press a lot and i am not sure americans are as aware of them but she retains high levels of redaction - wanted by the US government - which i find disgusting she has admitted - on camera - to pressuring snowden numerous times to be filmed in hong kong and as he was under incredible pressure it cannot be stressed enough that this crosses a journalistic ethical line protection of the source was not even a thought it seems - there was i think an idea that thru laura's connection to assange snowden would have safe passage... excruciatingly naive... +++ from many security people i have been told over and over > trust no one but i think it is really up to individuals to educate themselves regarding funding issues behind orginazations etc and make decisions for themselves if you dont know a lot about journalistic manipulation i would urge you to look into the church committee https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ED63A_hcd0 please look into the subsequent 'blowback' of EO 12333 (known as twelve triple three) by ronald reagan On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:05 AM Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
the intercept will never fucking "step up" and fuck you for writing such propaganda
Cari, I've dug through my mail archives to try to figure out what it is you have against The Intercept, and while I can't claim to have closely read every hit for your name and "intercept," I have been unable to find any reason you've given for your hatred. I did see a mention of a friend in prison, which seems like it may be somehow related?
I'm genuinely curious, because I don't have direct experience with anyone involved beyond their public reputations in relatively mainstream sources, so if there is a reason I should not be trusting them or Glenn Greenwald, it would be very helpful to know that. Of course, since I don't have any more reason to trust you than to trust Glenn, I'd appreciate anything you can provide that I can verify without too much effort.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
more proofs: here is a link where laura poitras admits she pressured snowden to go on film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzZfOOvwAMM i have other issues with her as i see her as an idealogue which is low level thought... but this has to do with many convos i had with her on twitter regarding her blind devotion to assange she has deleted her account on twitter @x7o so i would only be able to provide my side of the twitter convo but here you can look at some stuff here if you want https://twitter.com/search?q=%40carimachet%20%40x7o&src=typd&lang=en here is one highly redacted report from laura which i find particularly problematic because of the jeremy hammond case but overall its just not ok to align so much with the executive branch http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/documents-show-nsa-and-gchq-spied-... she stated at ccc that they get a lot of complaints about the slowness of the information coming to the public regarding the snowden docs and glenn said they have asked eff to take on some of the task but eff declined so maybe they are doing better at at least trying to get others to work on it still there is a reason that wikileaks is open ... i mean that decision wasnt just out of nothing ++++++++++++++++++++++ i worked at democracy now where jeremy worked as well at the time he was kind still a correspondent (that was waining) so i didnt work directly in the office but there are issues regarding democracy now and the union they have there ... him and numerous others that worked there before me for years did not confront these issues ... i was part of a group that confronted the union issues there which partially remain unsolved from my current info these are bizarre issues to hit when you are reporting on stories about walmart having issues with maltreatment of employees and not facing the issues of the very place reporting it ... so odd ... i wont elaborate on all of this union stuff but i will say if it isnt clear why there is a capitalist corruption within this then whatever i am not saying unions are so perfect but the issues there are just too much of a crossed line people point fingers at the corrupt government then are corrupt in their own lives? ++++++++++ here is glenns iraq invasion support admitting not admitting post http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-t... preface issue: "During the lead-up to the invasion, I was concerned that the hell-bent focus on invading Iraq was being driven by agendas and strategic objectives that had nothing to do with terrorism or the 9/11 attacks. The overt rationale for the invasion was exceedingly weak, particularly given that it would lead to an open-ended, incalculably costly, and intensely risky preemptive war. Around the same time, it was revealed that an invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein had been high on the agenda of various senior administration officials long before September 11. Despite these doubts, concerns, and grounds for ambivalence, I had not abandoned my trust in the Bush administration. Between the president's performance in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the swift removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the fact that I wanted the president to succeed, because my loyalty is to my country and he was the leader of my country, I still gave the administration the benefit of the doubt. I believed then that the president was entitled to have his national security judgment deferred to, and to the extent that I was able to develop a definitive view, I accepted his judgment that American security really would be enhanced by the invasion of this sovereign country. It is not desirable or fulfilling to realize that one does not trust one's own government and must disbelieve its statements, and I tried, along with scores of others, to avoid making that choice until the facts no longer permitted such logic. Soon after our invasion of Iraq, when it became apparent that, contrary to Bush administration claims, there were no weapons of mass destruction, I began concluding, reluctantly, that the administration had veered far off course from defending the country against the threats of Muslim extremism. It appeared that in the great national unity the September 11 attacks had engendered, the administration had seen not a historically unique opportunity to renew a sense of national identity and cohesion, but instead a potent political weapon with which to impose upon our citizens a whole series of policies and programs that had nothing to do with terrorism, but that could be rationalized through an appeal to the nation's fear of further terrorist attacks." he also discusses afghanistan in the preface... take a look at it for that info heres a link https://www.bookbrowse.com/excerpts/index.cfm?fuseaction=printable&book_number=1812 let me know if you have questions On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks for asking
we had a big argument on the list about it at one point but maybe it was more about glenn greenwald, jeremy scahill and pierre so the intercept did not come up for you as the target
my distrust is about numerous things but primary about authoritarian capitalism and the capitalist nation building of the USA
pierre omidyar gave over 1 million dollars to usaid programs in the ukraine before the 'revolution'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/01/1281233/-Pando-Pierre-Omidyar-Helpe...
https://shadowproof.com/2014/02/28/things-are-getting-weird-at-first-look-me...
in case you dont know - usaid is a front group for the cia - they stomp around the globe and either utilize uprising activists or create them for their own use ie authoritarian capitalism
if you need to know about that whole history of the cia then i highly recommend you look into the work of naomi klein - she is an economist based out of canada - there are tones of videos on the webs of her speaking her films - she writes books but sort of puts them to film
- if you need me to point you directly to information from her let me know -
but there are a lot of things the cia does and has done thru various front organizations like NED etc
it is kind of like the whole thing with soros that supports a lot of activism that may seem great on the surface but there are serious issues his money supports which creates more problems but this is whole huge other thing having to do with russia and other things ... caspar bowden also had criticism of soros which will explain to you the deeper issues regarding funding
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijr0E6Lw4Nk
i said at the time and numerous times before i would never work for dick cheney making fly fishing lures which essentially means it is a difficulty to retain ethics while taking money from the corrupt comparmentalizing out that you personally didnt drop a bomb on a child is an argument of willful blindness
of course these are not black and white issues but there are levels
the ideology that the USG engages/enforces is a horror - the powers are parasitic and plant parasites in the people and if you think that is not an issue for the living then i would urge you to educate yourself
+++
glenn greenwald wrote a book long ago whereby he claimed support for the iraqi invasion and afghani invasion after 9/11
stating something strange like he trusts the US authorities to be doing the right thing or some crap
the profound lie of the connection to 9/11 and iraq didnt seem to be an issue for him
if this wasnt enough to dissuade anyone from hailing his brain function he refuses to acknowledge this support of the invasion and apologize for it as if he never wrote such insanity
+++
jeremy scahill took a selfie with a murdered body in a morgue on a slab in mogadeshu for his little film dirty wars
this is unconscionable
if someone thinks this is not unconscionable then they dont know enough about journalism human rights or respect for that matter
he as a journalist for me is highly compromised because of his attachment to authoritarian capitalism that he engages
+++
laura poitras is a capitalist
i have issues as a journalist with her being embedded with the military in the iraq invasion - which interestingly jeremy scahill was not embedded as there was a huge ethics breech for journalists that agreed to the embed at least in my realm of journalism which is as an activist journalist
i think they held onto the snowden files for capitalist reasons moreover especially at the beginning
from the files she has produced articles out of german press a lot and i am not sure americans are as aware of them but she retains high levels of redaction - wanted by the US government - which i find disgusting
she has admitted - on camera - to pressuring snowden numerous times to be filmed in hong kong and as he was under incredible pressure it cannot be stressed enough that this crosses a journalistic ethical line
protection of the source was not even a thought it seems - there was i think an idea that thru laura's connection to assange snowden would have safe passage... excruciatingly naive...
+++
from many security people i have been told over and over > trust no one but i think it is really up to individuals to educate themselves regarding funding issues behind orginazations etc and make decisions for themselves
if you dont know a lot about journalistic manipulation i would urge you to look into the church committee
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ED63A_hcd0
please look into the subsequent 'blowback' of EO 12333 (known as twelve triple three) by ronald reagan
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:05 AM Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
the intercept will never fucking "step up" and fuck you for writing such propaganda
Cari, I've dug through my mail archives to try to figure out what it is you have against The Intercept, and while I can't claim to have closely read every hit for your name and "intercept," I have been unable to find any reason you've given for your hatred. I did see a mention of a friend in prison, which seems like it may be somehow related?
I'm genuinely curious, because I don't have direct experience with anyone involved beyond their public reputations in relatively mainstream sources, so if there is a reason I should not be trusting them or Glenn Greenwald, it would be very helpful to know that. Of course, since I don't have any more reason to trust you than to trust Glenn, I'd appreciate anything you can provide that I can verify without too much effort.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread, I replied privately to Cari. On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
here is a link where laura poitras admits she pressured snowden to go on film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzZfOOvwAMM
i have other issues with her as i see her as an idealogue which is low level thought... but this has to do with many convos i had with her on twitter regarding her blind devotion to assange
she has deleted her account on twitter @x7o so i would only be able to provide my side of the twitter convo but here you can look at some stuff here if you want
https://twitter.com/search?q=%40carimachet%20%40x7o&src=typd&lang=en
here is one highly redacted report from laura which i find particularly problematic because of the jeremy hammond case but overall its just not ok to align so much with the executive branch
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/documents-show-nsa-and-gchq-spied-...
she stated at ccc that they get a lot of complaints about the slowness of the information coming to the public regarding the snowden docs and glenn said they have asked eff to take on some of the task but eff declined so maybe they are doing better at at least trying to get others to work on it still there is a reason that wikileaks is open ... i mean that decision wasnt just out of nothing
++++++++++++++++++++++
i worked at democracy now where jeremy worked as well at the time he was kind still a correspondent (that was waining) so i didnt work directly in the office but there are issues regarding democracy now and the union they have there ... him and numerous others that worked there before me for years did not confront these issues ... i was part of a group that confronted the union issues there which partially remain unsolved from my current info
these are bizarre issues to hit when you are reporting on stories about walmart having issues with maltreatment of employees and not facing the issues of the very place reporting it ... so odd ...
i wont elaborate on all of this union stuff but i will say if it isnt clear why there is a capitalist corruption within this then whatever
i am not saying unions are so perfect but the issues there are just too much of a crossed line
people point fingers at the corrupt government then are corrupt in their own lives?
++++++++++
here is glenns iraq invasion support admitting not admitting post
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-t...
preface issue:
"During the lead-up to the invasion, I was concerned that the hell-bent focus on invading Iraq was being driven by agendas and strategic objectives that had nothing to do with terrorism or the 9/11 attacks. The overt rationale for the invasion was exceedingly weak, particularly given that it would lead to an open-ended, incalculably costly, and intensely risky preemptive war. Around the same time, it was revealed that an invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein had been high on the agenda of various senior administration officials long before September 11. Despite these doubts, concerns, and grounds for ambivalence, I had not abandoned my trust in the Bush administration. Between the president's performance in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the swift removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the fact that I wanted the president to succeed, because my loyalty is to my country and he was the leader of my country, I still gave the administration the benefit of the doubt. I believed then that the president was entitled to have his national security judgment deferred to, and to the extent that I was able to develop a definitive view, I accepted his judgment that American security really would be enhanced by the invasion of this sovereign country.
It is not desirable or fulfilling to realize that one does not trust one's own government and must disbelieve its statements, and I tried, along with scores of others, to avoid making that choice until the facts no longer permitted such logic.
Soon after our invasion of Iraq, when it became apparent that, contrary to Bush administration claims, there were no weapons of mass destruction, I began concluding, reluctantly, that the administration had veered far off course from defending the country against the threats of Muslim extremism. It appeared that in the great national unity the September 11 attacks had engendered, the administration had seen not a historically unique opportunity to renew a sense of national identity and cohesion, but instead a potent political weapon with which to impose upon our citizens a whole series of policies and programs that had nothing to do with terrorism, but that could be rationalized through an appeal to the nation's fear of further terrorist attacks."
he also discusses afghanistan in the preface... take a look at it for that info heres a link
https://www.bookbrowse.com/excerpts/index.cfm?fuseaction=printable&book_number=1812
let me know if you have questions
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks for asking
we had a big argument on the list about it at one point but maybe it was more about glenn greenwald, jeremy scahill and pierre so the intercept did not come up for you as the target
my distrust is about numerous things but primary about authoritarian capitalism and the capitalist nation building of the USA
pierre omidyar gave over 1 million dollars to usaid programs in the ukraine before the 'revolution'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/01/1281233/-Pando-Pierre-Omidyar-Helpe...
https://shadowproof.com/2014/02/28/things-are-getting-weird-at-first-look-me...
in case you dont know - usaid is a front group for the cia - they stomp around the globe and either utilize uprising activists or create them for their own use ie authoritarian capitalism
if you need to know about that whole history of the cia then i highly recommend you look into the work of naomi klein - she is an economist based out of canada - there are tones of videos on the webs of her speaking her films - she writes books but sort of puts them to film
- if you need me to point you directly to information from her let me know -
but there are a lot of things the cia does and has done thru various front organizations like NED etc
it is kind of like the whole thing with soros that supports a lot of activism that may seem great on the surface but there are serious issues his money supports which creates more problems but this is whole huge other thing having to do with russia and other things ... caspar bowden also had criticism of soros which will explain to you the deeper issues regarding funding
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijr0E6Lw4Nk
i said at the time and numerous times before i would never work for dick cheney making fly fishing lures which essentially means it is a difficulty to retain ethics while taking money from the corrupt comparmentalizing out that you personally didnt drop a bomb on a child is an argument of willful blindness
of course these are not black and white issues but there are levels
the ideology that the USG engages/enforces is a horror - the powers are parasitic and plant parasites in the people and if you think that is not an issue for the living then i would urge you to educate yourself
+++
glenn greenwald wrote a book long ago whereby he claimed support for the iraqi invasion and afghani invasion after 9/11
stating something strange like he trusts the US authorities to be doing the right thing or some crap
the profound lie of the connection to 9/11 and iraq didnt seem to be an issue for him
if this wasnt enough to dissuade anyone from hailing his brain function he refuses to acknowledge this support of the invasion and apologize for it as if he never wrote such insanity
+++
jeremy scahill took a selfie with a murdered body in a morgue on a slab in mogadeshu for his little film dirty wars
this is unconscionable
if someone thinks this is not unconscionable then they dont know enough about journalism human rights or respect for that matter
he as a journalist for me is highly compromised because of his attachment to authoritarian capitalism that he engages
+++
laura poitras is a capitalist
i have issues as a journalist with her being embedded with the military in the iraq invasion - which interestingly jeremy scahill was not embedded as there was a huge ethics breech for journalists that agreed to the embed at least in my realm of journalism which is as an activist journalist
i think they held onto the snowden files for capitalist reasons moreover especially at the beginning
from the files she has produced articles out of german press a lot and i am not sure americans are as aware of them but she retains high levels of redaction - wanted by the US government - which i find disgusting
she has admitted - on camera - to pressuring snowden numerous times to be filmed in hong kong and as he was under incredible pressure it cannot be stressed enough that this crosses a journalistic ethical line
protection of the source was not even a thought it seems - there was i think an idea that thru laura's connection to assange snowden would have safe passage... excruciatingly naive...
+++
from many security people i have been told over and over > trust no one but i think it is really up to individuals to educate themselves regarding funding issues behind orginazations etc and make decisions for themselves
if you dont know a lot about journalistic manipulation i would urge you to look into the church committee
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ED63A_hcd0
please look into the subsequent 'blowback' of EO 12333 (known as twelve triple three) by ronald reagan
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:05 AM Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
the intercept will never fucking "step up" and fuck you for writing such propaganda
Cari, I've dug through my mail archives to try to figure out what it is you have against The Intercept, and while I can't claim to have closely read every hit for your name and "intercept," I have been unable to find any reason you've given for your hatred. I did see a mention of a friend in prison, which seems like it may be somehow related?
I'm genuinely curious, because I don't have direct experience with anyone involved beyond their public reputations in relatively mainstream sources, so if there is a reason I should not be trusting them or Glenn Greenwald, it would be very helpful to know that. Of course, since I don't have any more reason to trust you than to trust Glenn, I'd appreciate anything you can provide that I can verify without too much effort.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:10:54 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread,
that's exactly what you did. I replied privately to Cari.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
basically sean wrote paternally to me that i am a lonely capitalist hater good/evil binaries ... lalalala i am a bad little girl that doesnt understand good and evil (religious ideation of sean) he/they didnt have time to look at the shit i wrote ... but i seem to have passion ... hehe blee blah blow ++++ sean doesnt understand political structure ... willfully blind... also doesnt understand ethics in journalism ... not making stories to make cash ...not making states in order to make cash, etc ethics are not about good and bad ... ethics are about alignment with intelligence On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:09 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:10:54 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread,
that's exactly what you did.
I replied privately to Cari.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
Ok, I've learned my lesson. Cari and Juan is/are either trolls or mentally ill. I suppose if I spent more time reading cpunks I'd have already realized that. On Fri, Feb 5, 2016, 11:58 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
basically sean wrote paternally to me that i am a lonely capitalist hater
good/evil binaries ... lalalala i am a bad little girl that doesnt understand good and evil (religious ideation of sean)
he/they didnt have time to look at the shit i wrote ... but i seem to have passion ... hehe blee blah blow
++++
sean doesnt understand political structure ... willfully blind... also doesnt understand ethics in journalism ... not making stories to make cash ...not making states in order to make cash, etc
ethics are not about good and bad ... ethics are about alignment with intelligence
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:09 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:10:54 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread,
that's exactly what you did.
I replied privately to Cari.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 22:30:27 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Ok, I've learned my lesson. Cari and Juan is/are either trolls or mentally ill.
lynch is yet another 'libertarian' clown. But that's something I already knew... Tell me asshole, what's your definition of troll? I find it quite funny how people who routinely post pro-government garbage are not 'trolls', including, you know high ranking CIA mafiosos. Furthermore, the CIA mafiosos and lapdogs call other people 'trolls'... but yeah, I'm really glad that the intercept and the retards who read the intercept, like lynch, are such a dangerouts threat to dan geer and friends, aka 'the establishment'...
I suppose if I spent more time reading cpunks I'd have already realized that.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016, 11:58 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
basically sean wrote paternally to me that i am a lonely capitalist hater
good/evil binaries ... lalalala i am a bad little girl that doesnt understand good and evil (religious ideation of sean)
he/they didnt have time to look at the shit i wrote ... but i seem to have passion ... hehe blee blah blow
++++
sean doesnt understand political structure ... willfully blind... also doesnt understand ethics in journalism ... not making stories to make cash ...not making states in order to make cash, etc
ethics are not about good and bad ... ethics are about alignment with intelligence
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:09 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:10:54 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread,
that's exactly what you did.
I replied privately to Cari.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
Dear juan - Daddy doenst love us cause he is lazy and has a parasite in his mind planted by the authoritarian capitalist state Boo hoo On Feb 6, 2016 12:30 AM, "Sean Lynch" <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Ok, I've learned my lesson. Cari and Juan is/are either trolls or mentally ill. I suppose if I spent more time reading cpunks I'd have already realized that.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016, 11:58 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
basically sean wrote paternally to me that i am a lonely capitalist hater
good/evil binaries ... lalalala i am a bad little girl that doesnt understand good and evil (religious ideation of sean)
he/they didnt have time to look at the shit i wrote ... but i seem to have passion ... hehe blee blah blow
++++
sean doesnt understand political structure ... willfully blind... also doesnt understand ethics in journalism ... not making stories to make cash ...not making states in order to make cash, etc
ethics are not about good and bad ... ethics are about alignment with intelligence
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:09 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:10:54 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread,
that's exactly what you did.
I replied privately to Cari.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
O its a libertarian zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ×( On Feb 6, 2016 1:06 AM, "Cari Machet" <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear juan -
Daddy doenst love us cause he is lazy and has a parasite in his mind planted by the authoritarian capitalist state
Boo hoo On Feb 6, 2016 12:30 AM, "Sean Lynch" <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Ok, I've learned my lesson. Cari and Juan is/are either trolls or mentally ill. I suppose if I spent more time reading cpunks I'd have already realized that.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016, 11:58 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
basically sean wrote paternally to me that i am a lonely capitalist hater
good/evil binaries ... lalalala i am a bad little girl that doesnt understand good and evil (religious ideation of sean)
he/they didnt have time to look at the shit i wrote ... but i seem to have passion ... hehe blee blah blow
++++
sean doesnt understand political structure ... willfully blind... also doesnt understand ethics in journalism ... not making stories to make cash ...not making states in order to make cash, etc
ethics are not about good and bad ... ethics are about alignment with intelligence
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:09 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:10:54 +0000 Sean Lynch <seanl@literati.org> wrote:
Just so nobody thinks I asked a question and then dropped off the thread,
that's exactly what you did.
I replied privately to Cari.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 07:28 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
more proofs:
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187
Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 00:17:08 +0100 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
O its a libertarian zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ×(
actually libertarian theory is solid - the problem is how people apply it. Majority of libertarians say "I love the free market, that's why I love google and coca cola!" or stuff along those lines. Or, "look at how amazing bitcoin is! It's not clear what we stand for, but thanks to government restrictions on money, we got rich! Just like high ranking drug dealers but with more finesse..."
On Feb 6, 2016 1:06 AM, "Cari Machet" <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear juan -
Daddy doenst love us cause he is lazy and has a parasite in his mind planted by the authoritarian capitalist state
Boo hoo
sure lotsa theories are 'solid' like cannibalist theory .... still putz my ass to sleep zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 12:54 AM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 00:17:08 +0100 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
O its a libertarian zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ×(
actually libertarian theory is solid - the problem is how people apply it. Majority of libertarians say "I love the free market, that's why I love google and coca cola!" or stuff along those lines.
Or, "look at how amazing bitcoin is! It's not clear what we stand for, but thanks to government restrictions on money, we got rich! Just like high ranking drug dealers but with more finesse..."
On Feb 6, 2016 1:06 AM, "Cari Machet" <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear juan -
Daddy doenst love us cause he is lazy and has a parasite in his mind planted by the authoritarian capitalist state
Boo hoo
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 02:41:39 +0100 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
sure lotsa theories are 'solid' like cannibalist theory ....
still putz my ass to sleep zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
well, if you ever have trouble sleeping then you can read "no treason" ^-^
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 12:54 AM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 00:17:08 +0100 Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
O its a libertarian zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ×(
actually libertarian theory is solid - the problem is how people apply it. Majority of libertarians say "I love the free market, that's why I love google and coca cola!" or stuff along those lines.
Or, "look at how amazing bitcoin is! It's not clear what we stand for, but thanks to government restrictions on money, we got rich! Just like high ranking drug dealers but with more finesse..."
On Feb 6, 2016 1:06 AM, "Cari Machet" <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear juan -
Daddy doenst love us cause he is lazy and has a parasite in his mind planted by the authoritarian capitalist state
Boo hoo
On 2/6/16, Александр <afalex169@gmail.com> wrote:
I find it quite funny how people who routinely post pro-government garbage are not 'trolls', including, you know high ranking CIA mafiosos. Furthermore, the CIA mafiosos and lapdogs call other people 'trolls'...
Oh, i love it. Thanks juan!
For those who kept their brain cell uninebriated last year and its synapse firing at least once a day, a few burner addresses got, well, burned - CIA boys apparently "just havin a bit of fun, don't worry about it you plebe" - quite the eye opener. Anyway, it's quite clear they send some folk this way for training. Although this one time, on cee pee, it seemed like damage control with a covert take down attempt - can't have those nasty Russians be highlighted in a positive way now... nasty, nasty, nasty we must believe, like you know, killers and drunkards, all the way down! I used to take down, in arguably humorous ways, certain annoying telephone persons who tended to ring me about some 35 year old debt they considered important or something. So then this one time, on the telephone, I realised I was training them, and in that moment I saw this sad fact, felt a bit depressed and sad about it, so I said to the lady who'd rang: "You're new at this [your] company right?" ... silence on the other end ... "You know, your company always sends the new guys to me for training, but I've had enough of that, now that I realise that's what you're doing, and I used to have fun with you, but it's not good that I'm training you because then you'll just be better at being aggressive to other people you call." ... more silence on the other end ... "So, I'm not going to talk to you people any more." Finally she speaks up with some indignation "You're not going to talk to me? But you need to confirm your name and a contact address?!" I think said "bye" or something before hanging up, can't remember cause that was a few years ago now. They stopped ringing me after that. A moral of the story is actually a bit earlier in history - in that first moment when I said "FUCK THIS" to the fear inside myself and confronted the bully at the other end of the phone, and this time I did it with dignity and simple questions asked back to that bully - I just didn't fucking care any more, but I was no longer angry either. The bully hung up the phone on me in less than 2 minutes. Damn that was a good feeling! I did not even realise they were about to hang up, but I sure pulled a surprised yet celebratory fist in the air when it happened. Recommended by Z - "confront the bully" Had others in stitches after that since I'd go and put these calls on speaker-phone, hoping that my friends might get some strange ideas about confronting telephone bullies instead of cowering meekly in fear and dumping their frustration on me afterwards. This one time, a particular friend (at the time, sadly no longer) was really pissed off when his phone rang, so I asked him "is that a debt collector?" "I think so, they keep fucken ringing too" he replied. "You want me to get it next time - I'll handle them for you eh?" to which he agreed, and right on queue, a few minutes later they rang back again. So, this particular one went pretty much like this (I first put the phone into loud speaker mode so everyone could listen in): me: "Hello?" Bully: "Is that Name Redacted?" me: "Who's calling please?" B: "I need to confirm if that's Name Redacted?" me: "Sorry, I don't know who you are." B: "I'm John from Credit Solutions Proprietary Limited, can you please put Name Redacted on the phone." me: "Well, ahh ... ... you might be speaking with him now." B: "Oh, ok, can you please confirm that your family name is Redacted?" me: "Well I'm not really wanting to do tha..." B: "THIS is an IMPORTANT business call and I can only speak with Name Redacted as it's a personal financial matter. Will you please confirm that you are Name Redacted and also give me your postal address?" me: "Look, you are wanting information from me." B: "YES, you need to confirm your name and contact details before we can proceed." me: "But I don't really want to proceed." B: "You are really starting to waste my time! Are you just a joker?!?" me: "Look, you've haven't caught me at the best time and I just wan..." B: "OK, I'll call back later, when's a good time to call you back?!" me: "Oh look, I'd rather get it out of the way now, but I don't know who you are?" B: "I TOLD you I'm JOHN from Credit Solutions and I'm in the Customer Care department - you can speak with my manager if you want to confirm that I DO work here!" [At this point I mumbled slightly because I didn't really want him to hear my next words:] me: <mumbling>"You don't sound very caring to me." B: "What was that? You want to speak with my manager?" me: "No, no, that won't be necessary." B: "What's your family name?!!" me: "OK. First, what's -your- family name and postal address?" B: "I, n.. no, I can't give you that information?" me: "Hm. So you can't give me that information." me: "Why can't you give me that information?" B: "We have a legal procedure." me: "Oh." me: "Ok." me: "Well, I -guess- I can understand that, since your company has a duty of care to you guys and all that. I guess we can always serve a Subpoena on your company if we needed that information." B: "WHAT?!" me: "Oh you know, if the police needed some information or something." B: "Things have always been done this way - it's nothing new you know!" me: "Yeah, I suspected that." B: "Anyway, can you please confirm your family name for me?" me: "Oh no! Sorry. I can't do that!" [At this point one friend (who's phone I'd answered) is starting to laugh under his breath, since he could see the last part coming up. Also, the next few lines are verbatim, and I personally was struggling to contain my mirth, since the bully at the other end of the phone STILL did not see it coming, and instead asks me the following question, point blank, and a little slowly, since I guess for some strange reason he seems to want to make sure he does not misunderstand me:] B: "You can't confirm your name?" me: "Nope." B: "Why not?" me: "I have a legal procedure." NOW he hangs up the phone. More laughs than we'd had in a long time. All in a few minutes flat. (Shared this with many people - hope it wasn't too long for the Internet.)
Александр wrote:
I find it quite funny how people who routinely post pro-government garbage are not 'trolls', including, you know high ranking CIA mafiosos. Furthermore, the CIA mafiosos and lapdogs call other people 'trolls'...
Oh, i love it. Thanks juan!
According the Juan, afaict, everything and everyone is pro-gubmint except him. Trigger Warning! "Vanguard" -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
rayzer ideology = grudgeholdism On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
Александр wrote:
I find it quite funny how people who routinely post pro-government garbage are not 'trolls', including, you know high ranking
CIA
mafiosos. Furthermore, the CIA mafiosos and lapdogs call
other
people 'trolls'...
Oh, i love it. Thanks juan!
According the Juan, afaict, everything and everyone is pro-gubmint except him.
Trigger Warning! "Vanguard"
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
On 2/6/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
Александр wrote:
I find it quite funny how people who routinely post pro-government garbage are not 'trolls', including, you know high ranking CIA mafiosos. Furthermore, the CIA mafiosos and lapdogs call other people 'trolls'...
Oh, i love it. Thanks juan!
According the Juan, afaict, everything and everyone is pro-gubmint except him.
Trigger Warning! "Vanguard"
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
I like your .sig, but perhaps you haven't figured out, riseup.net is the establishment's false opposition - "Occupy" bullshit and all that, used to capture as much rebellious protest energy as possible, channeling that into the most irrelevant non-directions of ephemeral bullshit we've ever seen. Oh yes, the occasional "petition" that begs the government for some scrap of bread. Here in Australia, it became clear at some point that Riseup.net was being driven by Labour ("Democracks"), but for those who haven't yet figured out the whois command, riseup.net is a product of a Washingtun, Ewe Ess Eh? company called Riseup Networks. Had potential. If it weren't the establishment. If you don't own it, you don't control it. If you don't control it, it may be used against you. If you can't trust those who DO control it, it WILL be used against you. Not a difficult principle...
I trust the riseup birds collective. Otoh my trust factor for you... ... ... Get the picture? --- RR “Borders I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people.” ―Thor Heyerdahl Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Александр wrote:
I find it quite funny how people who routinely post pro-government garbage are not 'trolls', including, you know high ranking CIA mafiosos. Furthermore, the CIA mafiosos and lapdogs call other people 'trolls'...
Oh, i love it. Thanks juan!
According the Juan, afaict, everything and everyone is pro-gubmint except him.
Trigger Warning! "Vanguard"
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them" I like your .sig, but perhaps you haven't figured out, riseup.net is
On 2/6/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote: the establishment's false opposition - "Occupy" bullshit and all that, used to capture as much rebellious protest energy as possible, channeling that into the most irrelevant non-directions of ephemeral bullshit we've ever seen.
Oh yes, the occasional "petition" that begs the government for some scrap of bread.
Here in Australia, it became clear at some point that Riseup.net was being driven by Labour ("Democracks"), but for those who haven't yet figured out the whois command, riseup.net is a product of a Washingtun, Ewe Ess Eh? company called Riseup Networks.
Had potential. If it weren't the establishment.
If you don't own it, you don't control it.
If you don't control it, it may be used against you.
If you can't trust those who DO control it, it WILL be used against you.
Not a difficult principle...
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
On 2/7/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
I trust the riseup birds collective.
Indeed there are some good folk in riseup, as everywhere. Riseup may even have a cause which may attain an actual outcome of actual 'improvement' (pick your definition) in the world, notwithstanding the fundamental undermine and authorities running that particular show.
Otoh my trust factor for you... ... ...
Get the picture?
You trust whom you trust. Your effectiveness in this world is a product of your ability to assess others, trustworthiness being one attribute. With those I don't know so well, I trust their actions in pursuit of causes which I am in support of. When their actions are counter to my concepts of common sense, support for worthy cause, assessment of a particular cause being worthy etc, my trust in them is reduced, possibly eliminated - depends how they then respond to certain questions, their willingness to take on board their own nature (aggressiveness, apathy etc). To all, as yourself, I say good luck in this journey called life.
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 22:07:10 +0000 Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
I like your [Rayzer's] .sig, but perhaps you haven't figured out, riseup.net is the establishment's false opposition - "Occupy" bullshit and all that, used to capture as much rebellious protest energy as possible, channeling that into the most irrelevant non-directions of ephemeral bullshit we've ever seen.
I noticed a couple of weird things about riseup.net. First thing is that there is a lot (relatively speaking) of messages from riseup addresses in the "tor-talk" mailing list. One would naively expect that 'progressive 'anarcho' commies would have nothing to do with the pentagon's fake anonimity network...yet they do. Also, taking into account what kind of joke 'cybersecurity' is, it doesn't look like a terribly good idea to use a centralized service like riseup. Even if we naively assume that riseup owners are 'honest'(...), their servers remain an 'interesting' target and will be treated accordingly.
Oh yes, the occasional "petition" that begs the government for some scrap of bread.
Here in Australia, it became clear at some point that Riseup.net was being driven by Labour ("Democracks"), but for those who haven't yet figured out the whois command, riseup.net is a product of a Washingtun, Ewe Ess Eh? company called Riseup Networks.
wikipedia's article is very very short, which is weird, especially considering the ideological overlap between both organizations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riseup
Had potential. If it weren't the establishment.
If you don't own it, you don't control it.
If you don't control it, it may be used against you.
If you can't trust those who DO control it, it WILL be used against you.
Not a difficult principle...
Yep...
juan wrote:
I noticed a couple of weird things about riseup.net. First thing is that there is a lot (relatively speaking) of messages from riseup addresses in the "tor-talk" mailing list. One would naively expect that 'progressive 'anarcho' commies would have nothing to do with the pentagon's fake anonimity network...yet they do.
Riseup is also the incubator for Tails development (labs.riseup.net). Don't use Tails either. Just go barefoot. See you in the camps but YOU'LL be there first sucka! -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 13:42:01 -0800 Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
juan wrote:
I noticed a couple of weird things about riseup.net. First thing is that there is a lot (relatively speaking) of messages from riseup addresses in the "tor-talk" mailing list. One would naively expect that 'progressive 'anarcho' commies would have nothing to do with the pentagon's fake anonimity network...yet they do.
Riseup is also the incubator for Tails development (labs.riseup.net).
Thanks for the info. I had assumed tails was a sort of side project of the tor faction to get even more tax dollars. Maybe riseup gets some DoD donations too?
Don't use Tails either.
I don't use tails =)
Just go barefoot. See you in the camps but YOU'LL be there first sucka!
Heh. Well, take into account that if you are closer to the camps, your chances of getting there first will increase...
juan wrote:
Riseup is also the incubator for Tails development (labs.riseup.net).
Thanks for the info. I had assumed tails was a sort of side project of the tor faction to get even more tax dollars. Maybe riseup gets some DoD donations too?
Maybe they don't know about it or care. Dunno. Don't care myself. I assume revolutionaries are dead men on furlough and there's a Predator drone somewhere over the horizon (or rooftop) with my metadata programmed into it, and a hellfire missile with a smiley-face painted on bearing the inscription "Have a nice day Rayzer". Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway you like...) certain nodes. -- RR Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. ~Oliver Wendell Holmes
On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
... Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway you like...) certain nodes.
drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, makes sure to plug leaks, like: iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc. best regards,
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 03:37 +0100, coderman wrote:
On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
... Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway you like...) certain nodes.
drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, makes sure to plug leaks, like:
iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP
see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc.
The downside of TAILS is that you don't get entry guards, which is pretty major. -- Sent from Ubuntu
FUCK V MAJOR i have boycotted tor for sooooo many years now On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Ted Smith <tedks@riseup.net> wrote:
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 03:37 +0100, coderman wrote:
On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
... Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway you like...) certain nodes.
drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, makes sure to plug leaks, like:
iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP
see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc.
The downside of TAILS is that you don't get entry guards, which is pretty major.
-- Sent from Ubuntu
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
Ted Smith wrote:
On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
... Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway you like...) certain nodes. drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, makes sure to plug leaks, like:
iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP
see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc. The downside of TAILS is that you don't get entry guards, which is
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 03:37 +0100, coderman wrote: pretty major.
MAC is spoofed... Helps. They can figure out, perhaps, where you are/were, but they can't id the computer. -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
but they used this evidence to the court to prove jeremy was the hacker so... On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:59 AM, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
Ted Smith wrote:
On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
... Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway you like...) certain nodes. drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, makes sure to plug leaks, like:
iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP
see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc. The downside of TAILS is that you don't get entry guards, which is
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 03:37 +0100, coderman wrote: pretty major.
MAC is spoofed... Helps. They can figure out, perhaps, where you are/were, but they can't id the computer.
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
Cari Machet wrote:
but they used this evidence to the court to prove jeremy was the hacker so...
If you watched IRC In the months before his arrest during various anon operations you would have seen Top saying 'barefoot' operation would be more effective (if I recall correctly I saw that on the scroll during Tahrir related ops). I suspect that's how they got enough info to find him. Ps. Jeremy's more than a hacker. He's one of the few I've seen who actually has any sort of coherent political analysis. He's not really 'a hacker in prison', he's legitimately a political prisoner.
I urge my comrades still out there in the trenches, sitting on some hot 0day, ready to loot databases and trash systems. If you want to stop war and terrorism, target who Martin Luther King Jr. called the largest purveyor of violence in the word today the US government. So Anonymous, get to it drone manufacturers, white hat infosec contractors, CIA directors, Donald Trump, and your local police department they all have blood on their hands, they are all fair game." Jeremy Hammond Rejects #OpISIS and the Co-opted Anonymous
http://auntieimperial.tumblr.com/search/jeremy+hammond -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them" Cari Machet wrote:
but they used this evidence to the court to prove jeremy was the hacker so...
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:59 AM, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net <mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net>> wrote:
Ted Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 03:37 +0100, coderman wrote: >> On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net <mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net>> wrote: >>> ... >>> Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's >>> tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of >>> something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're >>> 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway >>> you like...) certain nodes. >> drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, >> makes sure to plug leaks, like: >> >> iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP >> >> see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc. > The downside of TAILS is that you don't get entry guards, which is > pretty major. >
MAC is spoofed... Helps. They can figure out, perhaps, where you are/were, but they can't id the computer.
they had mountains of evidence ... they also had the evidence of his tor activity at his hut that is my point one of the many reasons i do not understand why people stand on stages and make nice comments about tor unless they are religious about the fucking USG and have a parasite it planted or they actually are the USG jeremy has an IQ of 161 so his powers of discernment are a bit potent On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
Cari Machet wrote:
but they used this evidence to the court to prove jeremy was the hacker so...
If you watched IRC In the months before his arrest during various anon operations you would have seen Top saying 'barefoot' operation would be more effective (if I recall correctly I saw that on the scroll during Tahrir related ops). I suspect that's how they got enough info to find him.
Ps. Jeremy's more than a hacker. He's one of the few I've seen who actually has any sort of coherent political analysis. He's not really 'a hacker in prison', he's legitimately a political prisoner.
“I urge my comrades still out there in the trenches, sitting on some hot 0day, ready to loot databases and trash systems. If you want to stop war and terrorism, target who Martin Luther King Jr. called the “largest purveyor of violence in the word today” – the US government. So Anonymous, get to it – drone manufacturers, white hat infosec contractors, CIA directors, Donald Trump, and your local police department – they all have blood on their hands, they are all fair game." — Jeremy Hammond Rejects #OpISIS and the Co-opted “Anonymous”
http://auntieimperial.tumblr.com/search/jeremy+hammond
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
Cari Machet wrote:
but they used this evidence to the court to prove jeremy was the hacker so...
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:59 AM, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net <mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net>> wrote:
Ted Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 03:37 +0100, coderman wrote: >> On 2/9/16, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net <mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net>> wrote: >>> ... >>> Somewhere on Tor's site I ran into something about how Tail's >>> tor/browser was more secure than the standard torbrowser because of >>> something the tails folks were doing with iptables. Perhaps they're >>> 'steering' traffic away from (or yeah, perhaps towards, take that anyway >>> you like...) certain nodes. >> drop packets that bypass the SOCKS proxy path into Tor client. also, >> makes sure to plug leaks, like: >> >> iptables -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP >> >> see also, Whonix-Qubes, etc. > The downside of TAILS is that you don't get entry guards, which is > pretty major. >
MAC is spoofed... Helps. They can figure out, perhaps, where you are/were, but they can't id the computer.
-- Cari Machet NYC 646-436-7795 carimachet@gmail.com AIM carismachet Syria +963-099 277 3243 Amman +962 077 636 9407 Berlin +49 152 11779219 Reykjavik +354 894 8650 Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet> 7035 690E 5E47 41D4 B0E5 B3D1 AF90 49D6 BE09 2187 Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without permission is strictly prohibited.
Cari Machet wrote:
they had mountains of evidence ... they also had the evidence of his tor activity at his hut
dDos doesn't work over tor very well, if at all. The IRC bot method employed by that hacked LOIC program was closer to being functional and secure... assuming no logs would be kept (and the software wasn't designed to leak info about the usr), which, as can be seen by "Ryan"'s dox dump of logs from one of the anon IRC servers, was not the case.
one of the many reasons i do not understand why people stand on stages and make nice comments about tor unless they are religious about the fucking USG and have a parasite it planted or they actually are the USG
The point is to make it's use pervasive and that makes it expensive to counter, and you BREAK THEM or at least inhibit their ability to go after anyone but the highest-of-value targets. That's why I support tor and promote it. Not because it makes one 'invulnerable, but because the more people who use it, the more impossible it gets for the authorities to cope. Telling people not to use it actually helps the feds in more ways than just 'in the clear' comms, and the gubmint's social engineers who cut tor down for it's insecurities at places like this list know that. And getting busted if it doesn't work out? Well you have to break some eggs if you want the omelet. You CANNOT HAVE a risk-free life AND oppose the murder machine. It's one (and mind you life is NEVER risk-free, you just get to choose the risks you want to take) or the other. Rebellion by any means necessary or go to the corner and sit on your stool. -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 13:55:28 -0800 Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
The point is to make it's use pervasive and that makes it expensive to counter,
what the fuck are you talking about rayzer. tor or any similar network don't work against so called 'global' adversaries like the US government. Tor can't protect people monitored by your government BUT your government can use tor to hide their traffic, but, to do that, they need 'ordinary' users. So what are you doing rayzer? Are you promoting tor so that the pentagon can both monitor their 'enemies' and hide in the traffic generated by tor unsuspecting users?
and you BREAK THEM or at least inhibit their ability to go after anyone but the highest-of-value targets. That's why I support tor and promote it.
you promote tor because you are either retarded or paid to promote tor.
Not because it makes one 'invulnerable, but because the more people who use it, the more impossible it gets for the authorities to cope.
too bad you don't know what you are talking about - or pretending.
Telling people not to use it actually helps the feds in more ways than just 'in the clear' comms,
false
and the gubmint's social engineers who cut tor down for it's insecurities at places like this list know that.
dude - you are the social engineer here - that is when you are not promoting the divine right of the state to regulate the use of bycycles.
And getting busted if it doesn't work out? Well you have to break some eggs if you want the omelet.
You CANNOT HAVE a risk-free life AND oppose the murder machine. It's one (and mind you life is NEVER risk-free, you just get to choose the risks you want to take) or the other.
Rebellion by any means necessary or go to the corner and sit on your stool.
On 2/6/16, coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/6/16, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
... well, if you ever have trouble sleeping then you can read "no treason" ^-^
trolls goading each other into reading and educating themselves? ... maybe they're just grossly inappropriate in sincerity, hmm
*grin*
This has DEFINITELY got to stop! You are WAY past your comedy quota for today. I propose a small moderator committee - each email with a smiley must be put to the committee for vote, with sanctions for attempted humour which fails to deliver.
On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 06:40:00 +0100 coderman <coderman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/6/16, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
... well, if you ever have trouble sleeping then you can read "no treason" ^-^
trolls goading each other into reading and educating themselves? ... maybe they're just grossly inappropriate in sincerity, hmm
should I take that as a compliment...of sorts? And how's your political education going?
*grin*
"Retracted: Dylann Roof’s Cousin Claims Love Interest Chose Black Man Over Him" Why would the Intercept even bother publishing shit like this? It's National Enquirer material. Ps. "Cari Machet" is now on my (bit)bucket list, at the server to save riseup.net the remailing bandwidth, thanks to her typically informative missive. Not that trolls care if anyone actually reads what they pathologically spew. -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them" Michael Best wrote:
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/02/a-note-to-readers/
Short version: One of their reporters was being dishonest, they caught it and fired them and have retracted one story and corrected several others.
It's nice to see they're trying to be accountable and aren't hiding their mistakes (AFAIK, they caught it before anyone else did and so weren't just "getting in front of things" to preempt an outing)
Kudos, Intercept.
participants (9)
-
Cari Machet -
coderman -
juan -
Michael Best -
Rayzer -
Sean Lynch -
Ted Smith -
Zenaan Harkness -
Александр