3 ms·
While it is convenient to pull out the quote "never attribute to malice..." the malice here has both mens rea and solid evidence. This is not about fighting cri
by sounds 12y ago
While it is convenient to pull out the quote "never attribute to malice..." the malice here has both mens rea and solid evidence. This is not about fighting criminals, judicial process, or even vague threats to national security.
Malice, n: the intention or desire to do evil. Ill will.
I will list a few, but I'm not going to debate the point or google the sources on these. If you don't see the malice here or want to disagree on minutiae, please do it briefly and then let's let it drop.
It seems like malice plain and simple when:
1. Keith Alexander lies to Congress about whether the NSA routinely intercepts totally domestic communications (bear in mind the NSA's stated charter).
2. The CIA deletes their records after it comes to light that they captured surveillance of Congress when Congress started an inquiry into the CIA for illegally putting surveillance on Congress.
3. James Woolsey publicly declares Snowden should be hanged for treason.
4. David Miranda is held inhumanely for 9 hours in Heathrow. He has never been implicated in the Snowden investigation or charged with anything else, for that matter.
5. The Guardian chooses to physically destroy their copies of Snowden's files when pressured by GCHQ. They can at least film the process.
6. NSA programs deliberately weaken encryption, subvert standard committees, infiltrate US businesses, sabotage hardware shipped through the US, and record all traffic at major internet switching points around globe. The stated intent is surveillance completely at odds with all major recognized statements of inalienable human rights.
Malice.
- ggreer 12y agoA note to those reading this exchange: sounds is using the tactic of replying with a list of tangentially-related, denotationally true but connotationally not-so-accurate points. If I don't spend an inordinate amount of time responding to every one of them, he can say, "Ah-ha, but you didn't address points 2, 4 and 5." I don't like taking things meta, but it's impossible to engage in a debate when confronted with such a mess. The sad thing is unless you've been on the receiving end of this tactic before, it usually works. Yes, all kinds of bad things have been done by the NSA, CIA, and GCHQ. But I (and the article) was talking about one man: James Comey, and one organization: the FBI. I don't see either mentioned in your reply.
- xnull2guest 12y agoI think maybe you are both right. You can have individuals who think they are doing good working within the confines of a body that is sometimes and in some capacity malignant. Law enforcement as a practice is ultimately the act of treating your own citizens as enemies. I think for the most part we have extremely well intentioned people in those roles. I don't think Hoover had outwardly malicious intentions - for example - but I do think an agency with an agenda to disrupt civilians that have political ideas that run contrary to policy goals or administrative priorities, even if its composed of nuns, will inevitably be malicious.