Posted on 06/10/2015 5:18:06 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
If they think that's bad, they should read the Religion forum here.
You mean was. It was a marketplace on TOR that you could purchase anything from drugs to weapons. Theybused several different endpoint detection methods to de anonymize users.
“Hmmm... I wonder if FR will be the next one...”
I learned to do this in the work environment. I evaluate everything I put on paper or bytes to see how it would look if taken out of context on the witness stand. I think some people are imprudent, especially when wishing the current occupant ill. Some of those could be taken as threats and if the DOJ wanted to shut down criticism the best way would be a show trial of people who made imprudent statements. (We really live in this kind of world now.) Recall that the Muhammad film maker spent time in jail for less than some have done. (Is he out?) We have arrived in Soviet America.
Another “free speech for me, but not for thee” commentary.
That’s a pretty fine distinction you’re making there. Saying the person should be fed into a wood chipper is an incitement to violence, isn’t it? Would a reasonable person consider it a threat if the same poster kept printing similar comments? I think so. This wasn’t apparently just one comment posted in anger.
I was born in a country that fought its way into existence through armed, open rebellion against its political rulers. In that country it was seen as healthy for members of the three branches of government to be regularly reminded that the murder of tyrants was always an option. Judges, legislators and members of the executive branch could feel confident only when acting constitutionally and would live in fear when they didn’t.
That was a great country. I wish I could live there again.
A site I used to frequent allowed both liberals and conservatives to “go at it” with virtually no language filters. The ratio was about 10% conservative and the rest liberals. Although conservatives would sometimes do it too, the MO of the liberals was ad-hominem attack.
Then an interesting thing happened. They stopped allowing fowl language. A lot of liberals ended up getting “temp banned” for a week or a month. The ratio became more like 20% conservative and the rest liberal.
Then the hammer came down. They stopped allowing ad-hominem attacks. You should have seen the complaints. Liberals said things like, “how else are you supposed to respond to the stupid remarks of conservatives”. They were intellectually lazy and felt that “their people” would do what they did: pile on via ad hominem.
But one by one they were temp banned and some permabanned. They could not defend themselves when they actually had to make a lucid argument. It became fun for me. It was like shooting fish in a barrel. But more and more of them just disappeared. The result? The site became about 60% conservative and the rest liberal. And us conservatives were getting “respectfully” cocky about it. We (most of us) knew how to argue. We knew our facts. They didn’t have a chance. They posted less and less.
The site is now gone.
Browser history: Obstruction of justice? Wiping Internet tracks is Obstruction
It is still easily traceable to you, unless you are more careful in how you access that account than I suspect you are.
You adding nuance to the the original scenarios I laid does not change that.
And I stand by the distinction I made.
Thanks.
Murder is evil. Killing someone in self defense is not evil. Killing someone like Hitler is morally good.
That said, would it be OK to kill innocents to kill a Hitler? For example, would it have been morally OK to nuke Berlin to take out Hitler (assuming the USA had the bomb earlier)? The Laws of Armed Conflict try to make sense of such things.
The same “justice” department that allowed the IRS to get away with its crimes and refused to prosecute the black panthers who blocked access to voting sites.
There is not, and has not been, free speech in the USA for 20 years.
I believe you’re right. There’s no such thing as anonymity on the internet—maybe from a typical citizen’s prying eyes, but certainly not from government or experienced hackers. If they want to find out who you are, they can do it. It just depends on how many resources they are willing to use to do it.
It’s yoir IP addy that you have to worry about.
I have never read the magazine but i enjoy the website. Articles from both sides without the DU nutjob bias.
If such show trials were to occur, you definitely wouldn’t want to be one of the showiest offenders. In the school of posting fish, don’t be an outlier, right? Those get picked off fast.
Frankly, I don’t know why someone would even waste their time posting comments about throwing people into wood chippers. Maybe they were venting. I don’t know, but discussion forums are meant for discussion. Those kinds of comments aren’t discussing anything.
The author wrote: Taking any human life is evil...
I wrote that I disagreed with that statement.
It was a simple comment, and I did not think it would elicit pointless rhetorical questions about the moral dilemmas associated with war and/or defeating evil.
I guess I give people too much credit for being able to interpret the meaning of my comments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.