World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[MrPopo]

Humans are infallible; that is what makes us think and opinionated the way we do.

Infallible means fallible? What a country!

[jp1]

Showing your work is great, but once you delve into subjective statements, it is no longer fact-checking, and thus should not carry the weight of being an impartial analysis. At that point, it is opinion journalism.

I'm not saying fact-checkers shouldn't exist, but things should absolutely be more clearly delineated between parts that are provably true, and parts that rely on an interpretation that one may not even have the ability to understand.

As a purely anecdotal example: My recent exchange with jp1 exposes some interesting gaps in both of our knowledge in understanding the "other side". I know he confessed to trying his best to understand where I'm coming from, but was often at a loss. Sometimes I find myself in the same boat. I wouldn't trust myself in any sort of fact-checking endeavor without someone there to provide significant ideological counterbalance, and that is often lacking at these outfits.

A very true statement. I want to understand your viewpoint, I just can't see how you rationalize it. I don't feel you haven't made the effort, just that there is some disconnect.

For instance, the video Ack posted is pretty damn hard to argue with, even though he is taking a comedic approach. I can't see how those verifiable facts are disputable.

[Sarge]

I think it's something that takes a very long time to do. Something that was likely rather clear from the length of my responses; that is one of the reasons I do not often delve into that territory, for the effort it often takes to explain the myriad underpinnings of my choices regarding politics, religion, and my life in general. I suspect it is so for almost everyone here, and we all value different things, or value the same things but in a different order.

The people that I understand the best are my friends; even those I disagree with. I suspect it would be the same with all of us given enough time.

[Tanooki]

I'd like to get an honest take on this. Put your loathe and contempt to Trump for the side and think this one over.

Gen Flynn was an undermining ass, he needed to go, that's clear. But what about what happened that got to that point? We have a situation here where our own intelligence agencies are leaking out information much like that cracked dam spillway in northern California which is very much not legal in any sense of the word. We have people from the inside of there and hold overs from the previous administration working within/around the Trump administration effectively spying and leaking government protected information to undermine the executive.

How do you feel about this and what should be done about it? Forget it's Trump for a moment and let's say it some faceless suit to keep it truly neutral. Basically asking how would you feel if the tables were turned and what kind of response is needed. Transparency is nice but only to a point that it doesn't cause a breakdown in trust and security too.

I think some people are in serious line for some well deserved jail time if they can find the sources.

[BogusMeatFactory]

The information is being leaked because the Trump administration refuses to handle it unless directly called out on it by the public.

[Tanooki]

You're dodging my question by attacking Trump. I asked how one would feel if this were a general situation not tied to him. This is about the leaking of information, not the cheeto messiah and his antics.

[BogusMeatFactory]

That isn't dodging the question. I am telling you exactly why they are leaking that information.

[Tanooki]

Well the question wasn't about why they're leaking it. The question was how do you feel about it and what should be done?

It's a general question more in line I guess you'd say with whistle blowers. Don't like trump, throw that traitor Bradley Manning in there, or Edward Snowden since he's fairly popular and got his own movie about it.

[BogusMeatFactory]

Well the question wasn't about why they're leaking it. The question was how do you feel about it and what should be done?

It's a general question more in line I guess you'd say with whistle blowers. Don't like trump, throw that traitor Bradley Manning in there, or Edward Snowden since he's fairly popular and got his own movie about it.

Okay to answer it. Nothing should be done considering that the Trump administration was well aware of their people communicating with Russia illegally for weeks before doing something about it when, *gasp* information leaked!

EDIT: Let me be more clear. I feel that there is no institution currently available within the government institutions that will allow for whistleblowing of illegal activity. You can not self regulate in that department. You need outside institutions and extra checks to make sure that everything is on the up and up.

Should there be leaks about not knowing how to turn on the lights in the Oval Office? No. That is just dumb. Should a person be able to call out the administration on illegal activity and holding individuals responsible? Absolutely. Sure there shouldn't be leaks, but there should be an organization set up to allow the leaks and hold people accountable.

[marurun]

We have a situation here where our own intelligence agencies are leaking out information much like that cracked dam spillway in northern California which is very much not legal in any sense of the word. We have people from the inside of there and hold overs from the previous administration working within/around the Trump administration effectively spying and leaking government protected information to undermine the executive.

How do you feel about this and what should be done about it? Forget it's Trump for a moment and let's say it some faceless suit to keep it truly neutral. Basically asking how would you feel if the tables were turned and what kind of response is needed. Transparency is nice but only to a point that it doesn't cause a breakdown in trust and security too.

This is a very complex issue, but the most simplified way I can look at it is, the reason we have leaks is because we have no formal means to release pressure. What I'm talking about are whistleblower laws. We have a number of whistleblower laws on the books, but they have proven completely ineffective at protecting whistleblowers.

National security operations run in such tight security that information the public really needs to know can easily remain buried and never revealed. It makes it incredibly tough to root out corruption and serious structural problems, because every leak is a crime. Some information is more important for the public to know than to keep secret, but our federal government is never going to err on the side of the public in that regard. So to make sure that someone is watching the watchers, and to release ethical pressure, we need stronger whistleblower laws. Under Bush and Obama whistleblowers were relentlessly punished. It was this complete undermining of whistleblower protections that lead Manning and Snowden to act as they did. If we had clearer, stronger, better protections for whistleblowers we might have had both of them releasing more tightly targeted data and receiving protection rather than just massive, unfiltered data dumps.

I am a strong proponent of government transparency, and I think all but the very most sensitive information should be available to the public. We need to watch our watchers. Current Federal practices are to classify almost everything, including tons of stuff which is already public knowledge. This is pointless and stupid. The FBI, for example, fights FOIA requests in ridiculous ways, requiring requests be faxed, charging inordinately high fees for every little document or bit of information, and redacting information which often is later revealed to be information that's already in the public sphere and isn't classified or secret in any way.

So until we have better whistleblower laws and better, more open compliance with FOIA laws, leaks are inevitable, and sadly, desirable. Because otherwise there's no way the public will get access to information of public interest.