Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

CNN Blackmail


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,624 posts

Posted 06 July 2017 - 09:38 PM

http://www.foxnews.c...eddit-user.html

So, CNN spent time and a lot of money in tracking down the person they claim is responsible for the "Offensive" gif President Trump Tweeted. They essentially threatened the person into apologizing, then go on to say that they won't release the person's identity, since it would put that person's life in danger. Only, only, they then go on to say that their not releasing his identity is subject to change, depending upon that person's behaviour.

Who the F*ck does CNN think they are!?

The hacker group annonymous should do massive ransomware attacks against CNN, plus post the phone number and addresses of EVERY CNN reporter.

The White House should revoke all of CNN's press credentials.

The DOJ should file extortion charges against CNN and throw the whole lot of them into prison, for a very long time.

And since CNN seems to like seeing Republicans being shot, perhaps some should....(Well no, Board GL's won't permit me to post the rest of that thought)
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#2 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,829 posts

Posted 06 July 2017 - 10:13 PM

You are definitely surreal.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#3 cade

cade
  • Islander
  • 413 posts

Posted 08 July 2017 - 08:43 AM

I'm completely against what CNN did but you went way overboard with those advised punishments and Republicans have been doing far worse to threaten free speech. Trump's administration ordered Twitter to release the identity of a user criticizing Trump. Thankfully, Twitter filed a lawsuit to block the order. When a Republican running for Congress assaulted a reporter, Trump was silent and then congratulated him on his victory. He's shown time and time again that he couldn't care less about free speech or privacy rights. He's been defending the thug tactics of dictators and oppressors since at least the 1980s.

http://www.newsweek....-protest-577216

Quote

Nineteen U.S. states have introduced bills that would curb freedom of expression and the right to protest since Donald Trump's election as president, an " alarming  and undemocratic" trend, U.N. human rights investigators said on Thursday.


https://thinkprogres...ds-a6c7c4cb06bd

Quote

With multiple felony charges brought against more than 200 people on Inauguration Day, police and prosecutors in the District of Columbia are putting activists on notice that legal protections ingrained in the Constitution may not apply to them, according to legal experts.

This new era of law enforcement is affecting policing tactics beyond Washington. The harsh treatment of protesters in the District since Donald Trump assumed the presidency — with a large number of people who did not engage in violence facing decades in prison for simply taking part in a protest — lets law enforcement officials across the nation know that a tough-on-dissent policy is acceptable, the experts said.

Edited by cade, 08 July 2017 - 10:18 AM.


#4 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,624 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 02:03 AM

View Postcade, on 08 July 2017 - 08:43 AM, said:


http://www.newsweek....-protest-577216

Quote

Nineteen U.S. states have introduced bills that would curb freedom of expression and the right to protest since Donald Trump's election as president, an " alarming  and undemocratic" trend, U.N. human rights investigators said on Thursday.


https://thinkprogres...ds-a6c7c4cb06bd

Quote

With multiple felony charges brought against more than 200 people on Inauguration Day, police and prosecutors in the District of Columbia are putting activists on notice that legal protections ingrained in the Constitution may not apply to them, according to legal experts.

This new era of law enforcement is affecting policing tactics beyond Washington. The harsh treatment of protesters in the District since Donald Trump assumed the presidency — with a large number of people who did not engage in violence facing decades in prison for simply taking part in a protest — lets law enforcement officials across the nation know that a tough-on-dissent policy is acceptable, the experts said.


Well when it comes to activists and their protests, it really boils down to the type. Yes, people have the right to protest. However, they do not have the right to destroy private, or public, property as part of their protest. They do NOT have the right to block traffic, essentially holding people in their cars hostage (that's a form of kidnapping, BTW).

I'm all for people exrecising their right to peaceful protest. But the very second those activists and their protests put my life, or my passengers lives at risk, by blocking traffic...they will become nothing more then a speed bump. And no, I'm not kidding at all about that. I will NOT put my life in the hands of mob rule mentality, or allow myself or my passengers to be held hostage.

As for CNN's blackmailing of the person behind the video....When I first heard about that, I actually wished with every fiber of my being, that I had thought to make that gif. Let CNN track me down and try their blackmail BS, because I'm not the One. It wouldn't have ended pretty for CNN, or any protestor that made the fatal mistake of trespassing on my property. Thankfully, NC allows homeowners to use deadly force to defend themselves while in their home, or on their property.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#5 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 01:56 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 09 July 2017 - 02:03 AM, said:

Well when it comes to activists and their protests, it really boils down to the type. Yes, people have the right to protest. However, they do not have the right to destroy private, or public, property as part of their protest. They do NOT have the right to block traffic, essentially holding people in their cars hostage (that's a form of kidnapping, BTW).

I'm all for people exrecising their right to peaceful protest. But the very second those activists and their protests put my life, or my passengers lives at risk, by blocking traffic...they will become nothing more then a speed bump. And no, I'm not kidding at all about that. I will NOT put my life in the hands of mob rule mentality, or allow myself or my passengers to be held hostage.

As for CNN's blackmailing of the person behind the video....When I first heard about that, I actually wished with every fiber of my being, that I had thought to make that gif. Let CNN track me down and try their blackmail BS, because I'm not the One. It wouldn't have ended pretty for CNN, or any protestor that made the fatal mistake of trespassing on my property. Thankfully, NC allows homeowners to use deadly force to defend themselves while in their home, or on their property.

Except cade's link shows that people could be in prison for decades, simply because they protested. NOT because they threatened anyone or destroyed property, so your "if they do this" seems an attempt to ignore this part. Unless you truly are threatening the non-violent protestors?

So you can use deadly force. How do you decide this? Someone is on your lawn with a camera and a clipboard. Are they the scout for a protest? Or are they a county assessor? What if a person comes onto your lawn and is trying to open your front door? Are they a violent protestor? Or are they a person with Alzheimer's who got lost and is highly confused? How about a person who stands in front of your home and begins shouting obscenities? Are they a violent protestor? Or is it someone who has just had a stroke?

How do you know who you are killing?
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#6 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 02:25 PM

Not defending or condoning protesters blocking traffic, but if they should block traffic while you are driving yourself or passengers and you somehow determine your life is at risk because you interpret blocked traffic as you being kidnapped, then the protesters will be nothing but speed bumps to you, assuming this means you will assault them with your vehicle, a deadly weapon, with intent to kill them. And no, you are not kidding about that.

I just hope that whatever prison you end up in after implementing your "self defense" scenario allows you some sort of Internet access so we can all hear how that works out for you. And, no, I'm not kidding about that.

Edited by yadda yadda, 09 July 2017 - 02:27 PM.


#7 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,624 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 11:50 PM

View Postyadda yadda, on 09 July 2017 - 02:25 PM, said:


I just hope that whatever prison you end up in after implementing your "self defense" scenario allows you some sort of Internet access so we can all hear how that works out for you. And, no, I'm not kidding about that.

Actually NC just recently passed a law about this, saying that if the Protestors block traffic and endanger drivers, then the driver isn't responsible for anything if the protestor gets run over. Of course that law also states you can't deliberately target protestors, but if I feel my life is in danger by a mob of protestors blocking the street, I will slow down so as not to kill upon impact, but I'm not going to stop. If the protestors are stupid enough to not get out of my way, then that is on them.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#8 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 12:55 AM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 09 July 2017 - 11:50 PM, said:

Actually NC just recently passed a law about this, saying that if the Protestors block traffic and endanger drivers, then the driver isn't responsible for anything if the protestor gets run over. Of course that law also states you can't deliberately target protestors, but if I feel my life is in danger by a mob of protestors blocking the street, I will slow down so as not to kill upon impact, but I'm not going to stop. If the protestors are stupid enough to not get out of my way, then that is on them.

So... if some of them are trying to get out of your way, but can't because others aren't moving for whatever reason (in crowds, this can easily happen), then you feel justified for injuring, possibly killing them? You know, the terrorists that run over people feel just as justified.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#9 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,985 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 08:30 AM

So I'm not entirely sure what the "correct" course of action for CNN here is.

1) Don't find out who made the GIF.
2) Find out, but don't tell anyone they found out.
3) Find out, and tell everyone who it was.
4) Find out, don't tell everyone who it was, and promise not to.
5) Find out, don't tell everyone who it was, and don't promise not to.

1, 2, and 4 are not consistent with their work as a news organization. 3 is hurting someone for no real reason. Am I missing an option here?

#10 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,803 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 09:03 AM

^ If they know, or feel, that it was criminal threatening behaviour in some way or fashion, or that it could be pursued as such, I would imagine there would also be:

6) Find out, don't tell anybody, but hold the information over the person's head to either encourage/coerce them to desist and/or become a source for them.
7) Find out, go straight to telling legal authorities in hopes that legal action will be taken against them and justice will prevail.

You are also forgetting trying to find out, but failing to do so. While not what they *strive* to do as a News Organization, I am sure it happens in the course of their work sometimes. The effort would be consistent with their works as a news organization, the result not something they want to be associated with their work with any sort of frequency ;) There is also another version of that, thinking they found out, but failing to do so (i.e. false information/lead).

Edited by sierraleone, 10 July 2017 - 09:04 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#11 cade

cade
  • Islander
  • 413 posts

Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:23 PM

View PostLord of the Sword, on 09 July 2017 - 11:50 PM, said:

Actually NC just recently passed a law about this, saying that if the Protestors block traffic and endanger drivers, then the driver isn't responsible for anything if the protestor gets run over. Of course that law also states you can't deliberately target protestors, but if I feel my life is in danger by a mob of protestors blocking the street, I will slow down so as not to kill upon impact, but I'm not going to stop. If the protestors are stupid enough to not get out of my way, then that is on them.

That bill has only passed the House so far, so you don't have license to run over protesters yet. Also, it doesn't say anything about endangering drivers, only blocking traffic (which, yes, could endanger a driver, but if they wanted the bill to only qualify in those circumstances they would've specified that in the legislation). It also says you have to "exercise due care." I don't think only slowing down as you knowingly hit protesters qualifies, but they probably used that vague wording to allow people to get away with it. Thankfully, similar legislation in North Dakota was recently voted down.

You seem to only give attention to protests that block traffic (which of course I oppose), but what about the mass arrests of protesters and some journalists on Inauguration Day? Sierraleone also posted a lot of info in the Dakota Access Pipeline thread on widespread abuse of the water protectors, and of journalists covering the protests. The corporation building the pipeline hired an international mercenary firm, TigerSwan, to spy on the protesters using methods that likely would've been illegal for law enforcement, and then TigerSwan was collaborating and sharing that data with law enforcement.

http://www.aljazeera...2063956218.html

Quote

On January 21, most of the 230 protesters and bystanders arrested the day before were charged with felony rioting, which carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years and a $25,000 fine.

But on April 27, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia returned a superseding indictment which added additional charges for some 212 defendants, three of whom had not previously been charged.

With new felony charges including urging to riot, conspiracy to riot and destruction of property, many of the defendants are facing up to 80 years in prison. Many other defendants, among them journalists, are facing more than 70 years.

...
Arguing that the charges against her and other protesters are politicised, Olivia Alsip alludes to an incident that took place the day before her arrest. John Joseph Boswell, a millionaire who travelled to the capital to celebrate Trump's inauguration, was arrested after sexually assaulting a maid in his hotel room.
Although he later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanour sexual abuse charge, Boswell was given a suspended sentence of 10 days in jail, a $50 fine and six months of probation.

"If the government cared about people's suffering they'd be working with us and engaging oppressed communities. But private property is more important to the government and society at large than human lives," Alsip concludes.

"I'm looking at spending more than three times my age in prison for going to a protest. No human being should be in a cage that long, especially not for trying to live."

http://grist.org/jus...ists-docs-show/

Quote

TigerSwan’s Oct. 10 report, for example, says that its “social media cell has harnessed a URL coding technique to discover hidden profiles and groups associated with the protesters allowing the firm to access private social media information. … Self-incriminating information can be gathered on protesters to be used at a later date.” TigerSwan gained access to a private Facebook page created by Cohen’s group, Mississippi Stand, which provided information on rides to get members to protests.

“If they were getting unauthorized access to Facebook profiles — not the public stuff, but things that they shouldn’t have — then that could potentially be a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the federal anti-hacking law,” said David Greene, senior staff attorney and civil liberties director at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Greene said that if TigerSwan simply exploited a Facebook vulnerability, it wouldn’t be a violation. The company would have had to break a security measure that the social network had in place for it to be a legal matter — and it’s unclear if that happened, based on the limited details provided in the records.

Stephanie Lacambra, a criminal defense attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the activities are potentially serious enough, however, that a subpoena should be sought to find out exactly what TigerSwan did.

Green added that “people who were spied on might have private causes of action. A typical cause of action might be for intrusion — the idea that their privacy was violated in a way that was sort of highly offensive.”


#12 cade

cade
  • Islander
  • 413 posts

Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:27 PM

View PostOmega, on 10 July 2017 - 08:30 AM, said:

So I'm not entirely sure what the "correct" course of action for CNN here is.

1) Don't find out who made the GIF.
2) Find out, but don't tell anyone they found out.
3) Find out, and tell everyone who it was.
4) Find out, don't tell everyone who it was, and promise not to.
5) Find out, don't tell everyone who it was, and don't promise not to.

1, 2, and 4 are not consistent with their work as a news organization. 3 is hurting someone for no real reason. Am I missing an option here?

My main problem was with CNN's implicit threat to expose his identity. I also question how newsworthy it was to go to all that effort to learn his identity (considering all the other far more important stories that CNN ignores or barely covers), though given how often people like to dismiss online racism as just "trolling by teenagers," it was nice to see that claim debunked here.

#13 Omega

Omega

    Nous sommes tous Franšais

  • Moderator
  • 3,985 posts

Posted 14 July 2017 - 08:12 AM

If the GIF had been made by someone interesting (Russia, Trump himself, etc.) that might have been newsworthy. Random internet guy isn't so much.

#14 Niko

Niko
  • Watchdog
  • 2,183 posts

Posted 14 July 2017 - 09:47 AM

View Postcade, on 13 July 2017 - 11:27 PM, said:

My main problem was with CNN's implicit threat to expose his identity. I also question how newsworthy it was to go to all that effort to learn his identity (considering all the other far more important stories that CNN ignores or barely covers), though given how often people like to dismiss online racism as just "trolling by teenagers," it was nice to see that claim debunked here.

Yeah, making his identity a news story in and of itself is pretty lame.  I wish they'd used it as a jumping off point for some broader look at trolling and its role in what's going on in the country right now.  This American Life had a bit of a segment a while back on the troll contingent amount trump supporters, and it's become one of the lenses that I've been watching this "presidency" through.  It scares me quite a bit.

Yes, doxxing a guy for making a gif that is simple political speech is not cool, but I feel like we're at a point where too many people are using the anonymity of the internet to allow them to be such horrible, horrible people online.  Just the fact that this gif guy had so much garbage he was saying online that would be damaging enough for him to feel blackmailed at the possibility of being doxxed... we need to look at our society if we're at this point where it's perfectly okay to say this kind of crap "as long as my friend/wife/coworkers/parents don't find out".   It seems to me that the only way to find that sort of trolling is to start shining some light in those dark corners and get back to the idea of people taking ownership of their speech.  If you want the freedom to be a racist piece of crap, then frickin' take ownership of that and deal with the consequences.

Now, the question on where to draw the line in that sort of thing is a larger conversation - I've never said anything politically that I'd be ashamed to admit in public, but I certainly wouldn't want my whole browser history spread out in front of my mom - but I do think the trolling situation is never going to improve until we, as a society, find some way to hold people accountable for hate-speech, even when it's done by some anonymous rando on the internet.
- Whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do unto me.    (Matthew 25:40)

- Do not let kindness and truth leave you; Bind them around your neck, Write them on the tablet of your heart.  (Proverbs 3:3)

#15 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,829 posts

Posted 14 July 2017 - 07:50 PM

Freedom of speech wasn't intended for the Interweb. It was intended for public speech or publications. In other words, anonymity wasn't part of the bargain.

The very thing that created trolling was anonymity.

Sussing out trolls, making it impossible to hide one's identity, is a case of turning on the lights to make the cockroaches scurry for cover.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users