[ExI] sugar industry corruption

[William Flynn Wallace]

Is there a hint of impropriety there? So… impeach him.



BillW well done, sir!  spike


A problem that occurs at every level:  "I am now a big and important person
and don't have to obey the rules."  This may occur in a person who is in
charge of a team of janitors or a team of generals.  Maybe it can't be
helped but when they go very far they need to be slapped down.  No one at
any level can be trusted to do any job without scrutiny. Egotism and
selfishness are part of all of us;  we are fond of oneupmanship and
schadenfreude.  We are also a race of thieves.


Going into executive session because the issue is personal is excusable,
but is routinely abused just to hide something or somebody.  No system is
perfect.


If I were in charge of something, a department or company and a person who
was a whistleblower elsewhere applied for a job, I'd hire them right away
and ask for more.  I'd want to know the problems in my area.

----------------------------------

When I joined this group I noticed right away that flaming was absent; that
discussions were on a high level.  If I had seen sarky, snarky, posts full
of ad hominem arguments, I would have left asap.


So - discussions and disputes are carried on by gentlemen.  I hope it stays
that way.  I am a libertarian liberal and proud of it.  If I have offended
anyone in any way, all they need to do is inform me and I will apologize
forthwith and avoid the offending content in the future.  It doesn't matter
to me if the offense is unintentional or inadvertent; offense has occurred
and needs to be fixed.  It doesn't even matter if I think they are just
being silly and should not be offended.


Just let me know.


bill w

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:19 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *>…* *On Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption
>
>
>
> >>…Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja?  So
> do we.
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
> >…Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem:  the
> Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on
> sensitive information by declaring it a secret … bill w
>
>
>
>
>
> Ja, well done sir.  The critical distinction is that for information to be
> declared secret, the classifying agencies need to have it on a dot gov
> secure server which is encrypted so the bad guys cannot get to it.  Secret
> information cannot legally be passed around on unsecured servers because it
> is not reliably encrypted (if at all) and is not properly archived, in a
> format searchable from all accounts, sender and all recipients (has to be
> in all places, so they can verify the documents were not modified.)
>
>
>
> If you hear someone comment that the State Department’s server was hacked
> but the Clinton server was not, the person who made that comment doesn’t
> understand the State Department server capable of handling classified
> information has not been hacked and there is no reason to even attempt to
> hack it, since the information on that is encrypted.  Their unclassified
> server was hacked, but that contains nothing that cannot be made public.
>
>
>
> When you hear someone say they sent or received this or that and they
> assumed (assumed?  Indeed?) that it was being archived by the account of
> the sender or receiver, that isn’t good enough.  The ‘frigging rules’ (the
> law) requires proper archiving on both (on all) ends.  The frigging rules
> make that very clear.  The ones briefed on the frigging rules sign under
> oath that they understand and will comply under penalty of law.
>
>
>
> If those frigging rules are flouted, the law is broken by someone who has
> sworn to uphold the law, which is an impeachable offense.
>
>
>
> If those frigging rules are followed, there is still concentrated power,
> but it is accountable power, which is the kind we grant to government.
>
>
>
> If those frigging rules are intentionally defeated (not that it has
> happened, recently) we have unaccountable concentrated power, which leads
> to yoga and subsequent profits from the yoga being funneled to Canadian
> charities and on to US charities for instance, and inestimable damage done
> to the victims of that yoga and our country.
>
>
>
> Those frigging rules are the law of our land.  Our leaders are obligated
> to follow them.
>
>
>
> You are right: Colin ‘Frigging Rules’ Powell served under W, and committed
> impeachable offense, as he specified in his own words in the 23 Jan 2009
> memo:
>
>
>
> http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000157-0719-d31b-a7df-e71dbfe80001
>
>
>
> Is there a hint of impropriety there?
>
>
>
> So… impeach him.
>
>
>
> BillW well done, sir!
>
>
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160916/43c6a02c/attachment.html>