You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
The Fifth Rule Of Zero Hedge Is...
In my capacity as a casual comment viewer on Zero Hedge I have found myself of late issuing an unduly expansive number of warnings for bad behavior in print. One hates to use the heavy hand of moderation on a site dedicated to transparency and throwing sunlight on the cipher-laden world of finance, but I need to make something absolutely clear:
Anyone directly advocating violence against any individual, group of individuals, institution or organization is going to feel the sting of the lash from here on out.
This kind of psychotic noise gives us a bad name (kill the messenger, you know), tends to attract the attention of authorities, particularly in the United States (which is already predisposed to wonder after our subversive criticism of The One and the National Security™ risk we present to Bailout Nation) and more importantly, is antithetical to the goals and purposes of Zero Hedge.
To be even more specific:
Zero Hedge and the legal team here will vigorously oppose thorough all the legal means at our disposal any attempt to obtain, coerce or outright steal data from our offshore servers. This probably won't take much effort since we keep very sparse logs in the first place. However, it is not impossible to imagine that we would entertain a very narrow exception if asked to cooperate with authorities. To wit:
The credible threat of future violence.
There is no moral position we are willing to entertain that would permit us to stand idly by and ignore cases like these.
Let me provide some examples so there will be no misunderstanding:
- "Let's throw [all the bankers/banker x/that loser currently on trial] in jail." [Stupid on a truly Henry VIesque level, even forgetting for the moment that you probably only know as much about any particular case as you have read that afternoon in the New York Post - but borderline - seems to suggest due process (of a sort) at least]
- "Let's kill all the bankers." [Stupid on a truly Henry VIesque level, and also infringing - violence]
- "The next time you meet a Goldman employee, crack a fucking bottle over their skull." [Beyond stupid. Intensely infringing]
- "I'm going to slit [hedge fund manager's throat] when I next see her at L'escale in Greenwich." [So mercifully free of the ravages of intelligence so as to be mistaken for a mineral. Infringing to the level that causes serious and animated debate among the Senior Staff at Zero Hedge over the wisdom of proactively reporting this potential conduct to the authorities]
Hey. How about you do yourself and all of us a favor? Just because it's borderline and we appear to be tolerant, don't just defecate all over the whole of due process jurisprudence (due process IS in the Constitution of the United States, you know. You don't hate the Constitution. Do you, my outraged patriot friend?) as well as immediately brand yourself as a reactionary, populist tool who differs with Barney Frank only in the degree to which you tolerate violence by calling for hanging some random douchebag banker.
»
- 7126 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
that is CRAMMED full of Win.
No, this is crammed full of ignorance. Sorry Zero Hedge, looks like you just sold your soul.
Perhaps Shakespeare would be banned from ZH:
“The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers.”
And keep in mind that the United States and all of the freedoms you people enjoy would not even exist if our forefathers had not been willing to discuss and USE violence:
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Marla, maybe you need to get back in the kitchen and let the boys handle things.
Wow...
Sounds like you need to start your own site dude. To quote a character from your avatar, "Go peddle crazy somewhere else... We're all stocked up here."
Uh... you do know:
1. That line is satire.
2. I cited it indirectly in this very post? ("Henry VIesque")
3. I think you need to re-read what I said. You missed it entirely. Really. On every level.
or it missed
The guy quotes the bard to critique my post which, unbeknown to him cites the bard.
Yeah, I'm guessing I'm not the issue.Just one question Ms Smartypants.
"Anyone directly advocating violence against any individual, group of individuals, institution or organization is going to feel the sting of the lash from here on out."
Are you threatening me with violence if I threaten someone with violence?
I thought this was The Fight Club!? We fight, we are viciously violent, cunning, and above all we do whatever it takes to win.
Over the past 6 months you have become the ever present entity of annoyance on this site. Tyler has to rethink his policy of letting females into The Fight Club. Now YOU own the place and you want to change the rules? Typical American bish.
NO GIRLS ALLOWED IN THE FIGHT CLUB! Girls in the fight club ruin the fight club, go away!
Shut up. You are why they should just ban anon users. I think there is some difference between a figurative allusion to the sting of a lash and "duh, imma slit that guy's throat".
BTW, the whole Fight Club theme is a theme, based on a movie, that is fiction, and over-the-top fiction at that. How old are you, 10?
This site is doing a great job of presenting lots of important data for people to consider and act on. The content's credibility is shown in the rapid rise of this site. The comments used to be a click away and I wish they still were so no one would see them by default. Comments like yours are embarrassing and lower the credibility of the material.
No, You shut up..
violence is the last refuge of the incompetent - Asimov
Gandhi, and a lot of other cool folks, got rid of the bad guys without it.
and besides, then you're not a hypocrite.
violence is the last refuge of the incompetent - Asimov
Tell it to the founding fathers...
Last Refuge AGAINST the incompetent...and those blind to competent governance
Remember back in Feb/April/March `09 when Marla was not even here?
No violence back then, huh?
Then Marla enters the picture. As time goes by hostility builds and violence breaks out.
"It's not me Tyler, it's THEM!"
violence is the imposition of physical force against the will of another. In most contexts, it is criminal.
but with some caveats
society has always agreed to let certain gatekeepers and peacekeepers carry the stick to keep things "in order."
I assume one of your justifications for violence is that our government is asserting force against us (and others far away) for what is ultimately unlawful, unconstitutional, illegal purposes. I think most of us agree - they are.
but how do we leap from that to violence as the FIRST and/or ONLY solution?
as #128642 just indicated, it is (also) the "LAST" refuge against the incompetent.
Have we really run out of all our options?
Have we exercised any of them in any real serious, organized manner?
That's the other problem with violence. Like our frolic in the middle east, violence is hard to control, it breeds chaos, hatred, and confusion of the issues. Not always, but often.
Tell me what organized peacefull but massive efforts we have put on?
Have we tried to remove everyone of both corrupted parties?
Have we tried to coordinate an economic shut down /sit in / sit down / whatever?
Have we tried to coordiante ACTION with angry folks all over the world?
there are many, many opitons that smart folks like those on this site can come up with.
unfortunately, and least for now, we do not carry the stick, and those who do aren't wacking the right folks but shouldn't we first try to get the stick through peaceful constitutional means?
I know we've lost faith in them
but we need more faith in ourselves
and a little courage
Where do I begin??
I assume one of your justifications for violence is that our government is asserting force against us (and others far away) for what is ultimately unlawful, unconstitutional, illegal purposes. I think most of us agree - they are.
but how do we leap from that to violence as the FIRST and/or ONLY solution?
Do you know what happens to people who ASSUME?
Please point out to the listeners where in my brief post, that I forwarded VIOLENCE as the FIRST AND ONLY solution. The context of using the founding fathers as an example has a long history that I wasn't about to resurrect in that post..Try to visualize..
In closing, there have been many articulate and well reasoned exercises within the established framework of civil society that have been trampled... I can only suggest that research is your best bet to ferret out those efforts, and study them vigorously..
Good Luck..
As long as you're not equating exercises "within" and without "the established framework of civil society" with peaceful and violent resistance. You do seem to be equating success rates with P&V factors. If so, I think we disagree on lessons from history and the human potential.
As long as you're not equating exercises "within" and without "the established framework of civil society" with peaceful and violent resistance.
Within,,Without? is there a penalty if I take one or the other?, and who will administer this punishment??
All within today's civil society, which in function is missing equitable effectiveness,,,
The tribes are restless....
How much smaller can this text get?
P
r
e
t
t
y
s
m
a
l
l
.
I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you DJ.
Ghandi is a mythical character.
Ghandi = India what Mickey Mouse = Disneyland.
It makes a nice story and a good mascot for India.
Sheeple eat it up.
Back on topic...
I don't condone violence. I just pray for cancer and suicides.
Your last few points are common sense. A threat is a threat. However I find your first point somewhat hypocritical. I'm sure anyone on here can go back and pull some of your articles or TD's where you refer to some actions taken as being illegal and by insinuation you are saying they deserve some sort of punishment. Almost all of these comments were made without "due process" being invoked to actually prove they were illegal. I fail to see the difference between that and someone posting {insert name here} deserves jailtime for what they view as illegal activities.
Seriously people, can you read? She made it clear what is intolerable:
The constant righteous "don't put boundaries around us, no girls allowed" makes you all sound like 11 year boys on a testosterone high.
Do yourselves and us a favor and get the fuck over it.
Seriously, can you read? Her first point has nothing to do with the credible threat of future violence. If all her points were based on that I don't most people would have an issue with it.
Very diplomatic of you there, Marla. But to be a technical stickler ya just couldn't ban Bill, but maybe Ed de Vere.
Or the real Shakespeare - Henry Neville.
See The Truth Will Out: Unmasking the Real Shakespeare by Brenda James.
You got it going on, Ms. Singer! The U.S. Declaration of Independence and Preamble to the Constitution is all the attitude that is needed. For those bad boys that need to communicate in actionable verbs, remember that double secret probation kept Animal House on notice and Blutarski did become US Senator after all. Making order out of chaos is hard work and ugly sticks stir badly and are a poor choice.
In short, it's your world; we'll just try to live in it. If we don't like the news, we'll make some of our own of which we have the pride of creation.
Boys destroy, men create.
"Boys destroy, men create."
indeed.
Tyler Durden: Where'd you go, psycho boy?
Narrator: I felt like destroying something beautiful.
That was fiction. Obviously Blutarski is way to intelligent and competent to ever be come a US Senator.
*repost*
I do not want the comments devolving into the screams of a mob.I don't want ZH to lose credibility by association with and toleration of lunatics.A no threats of violence policy makes sense.That being said.........
Let us talk for a moment about fear.This site posts things consistently that really piss off very powerful people.The laws in place today make going after posters and web sites quite easy.Do you want to be labeled as a terrorist?
Here is what can happen:Incarceration in a military brig.Torture.Torture.More torture.
Remember, this is the United States.We torture and we extradite to countries with vast experience in it.
There is no privacy in the US.If you are considered a credible threat they will find you and make your life miserable.If you have a business, they can destroy it at incredible speed.
This is why I admire the ZH staff.They are doing dangerous work.
They should be afraid.Idiots make it easier for TPTB to run amok all over them.
Fear.It is sad that it has devolved to this.
I agree. The question is not "are you paranoid" rather "are you paranoid enough" I don't give the violent statements on this site more than the briefest scan (as, I presume, do the vast majority of reader here), but if they might be used as an excuse to go after the site......well fudge 'em
LOL
Zero might I suggest that you purge some of your archives before some enterprising DA takes screen shots of some of the more offensive ones. For example we have this post, which I have included an excerpt of below (I have taken the liberty of removing any offensive or libelous language):
not sure which of the above categories this falls under but I think libel would be a sure bet, though the Hague comment might require that you add another category.
The comment cited (while it is a brainless rant that provides no value to the site) is not legally problematic:
An accusation of stealing against a company such as Goldman Sachs of criminal behavior is not a threat of violence, nor is it even libel (as the Company would surely be deemed a public figure).
The comment referenced states they should be taken to The Hague, which implies putting Goldman (and, I assume, its upper management) on trial. This is not an unreasonable statement to make about what you believe to be a criminal entity.
The statement that "they should all be thrown in jail" is not an unreasonable follow on to the above comment re The Hague, though it does presume guilt (which a court of law in the United States cannot do but an individual can)
There is no threat of violence here. This is the kind of comment that should be flagged as "junk," however, outright censorship of it is completely unwarranted.
Also the comment that you cited is a quotation of a comentator posted by TD. So your point is really based on nothing.
depends on the context in which the quotation is presented. Further making a definitive statement that a company "is stealing $100 million a day" could well elicit a legal response.
Legalities aside, you (Señor T) state that the quotation Tyler D published, which I referenced, is "a brainless rant that provides no value to the site". I am not sure I would characterize it like that though it certainly appears to fall into at least one of the examples in MS's list of very narrow exceptions. (unless of course making a statement "between quotation marks" is an exclusion)
Marla,
I assume this means you'll stop sleeping with your oft mentioned sidearms.
They feel nice between my legs.
I'm kinda partial to #5 myself:
O for a Muse of fire, that would ascend
The brightest heaven of invention,
A kingdom for a stage, princes to act
And monarchs to behold the swelling scene!
Then should the warlike Harry, like himself,
Assume the port of Mars; and at his heels,
Leash'd in like hounds, should famine, sword and fire
Crouch for employment. But pardon, and gentles all,
The flat unraised spirits that have dared
On this unworthy scaffold to bring forth
So great an object: can this cockpit hold
The vasty fields of France? or may we cram
Within this wooden O the very casques
That did affright the air at Agincourt?
O, pardon! since a crooked figure may
Attest in little place a million;
And let us, ciphers to this great accompt,
On your imaginary forces work.
Suppose within the girdle of these walls
Are now confined two mighty monarchies,
Whose high upreared and abutting fronts
The perilous narrow ocean parts asunder:
Piece out our imperfections with your thoughts;
Into a thousand parts divide one man,
And make imaginary puissance;
Think when we talk of horses, that you see them
Printing their proud hoofs i' the receiving earth;
For 'tis your thoughts that now must deck our kings,
Carry them here and there; jumping o'er times,
Turning the accomplishment of many years
Into an hour-glass: for the which supply,
Admit me Chorus to this history;
Who prologue-like your humble patience pray,
Gently to hear, kindly to judge, our play.
Yes, beautiful ....
+1000000000 e100
Psssst. Hey Cheeky, I know who ZH's legal team is.
http://www.legalzoom.com
Scary huh?
Spanking. What if I simply want to give said banker a firm smack on the bottom and send them on their banking way? Enough to leave it rosey, but not hard enough to bruise.
You've seen Trading Places right?
Take a page out of it.
Hmmm.... well, that was interesting.
1) Just so long as we can continue making indirect threats.
2) Any hatred of the Constitution stems from the utter decimation of the vision contained therein. I support the Constitution but also think it needs to be amended majorly, although I also recognize the danger involved in such machinations. God knows we'd end up making it worse instead of better. And, of course, any such amendment process would need to follow the rules prescribed by the supreme law itself (says the minarchist who has sworn an oath to support the Constitution).
I say we expunge all Amendments after the 10th (i.e. keep the Bill of Rights) and start over, this time doing it right.
The amendment process is actually kind of stupid. I'm all for mini-revolutions every 20 years. Change the Constitution to suit the day, but never, ever, violate the Bill of Rights under any iteration. Society must mature and evolve somewhat to favor this type of system. Society must be willing to flush out the system periodically, adopting what worked from the previous version and eliminating what didn't. This is not done frequently or thoroughly enough, and often when it's done, if it's done at all, the transformation is incomplete and always within the confines of the old rules. This must change.
I am Chumbawamba.
Maybe an amendment to eliminate the House of Lords. Then we'd never have to hear about the 69-vote rule again.
Can i refer to AIG as a "mercy kill"? ...but in do agree, i like ZH for its alternative view points from popular media and hate to see it degraded by less then intelligent comments.
Commenters who make credible threats of future violence are generally not the sort to be deterred by a policy. How will it be enforced? Deletion?
Patriots would never advocate violence or engage in any form of bloodshed. In fact they eat only organically coddled vegetables, meditate on Zen buddhist peacemaking, and submit to tyranny's bayonets without a whisper of dissent. True patriots go to the grave without any forceful opposition to immorality, inequity, dishonesty. That's why they are called patriots.
They live to die for their country. Anonymously and without effect.
LOL. Well said.
From the British perspective, many of the founding fathers were terrorists. The town bulletin board in the middle of Boston was plastered with credible threats of future violence all the time. Eventually, the board had to come down.
That's the point of a policy like this. It's not based on some half-baked moral rationale composed of thrice-split hairs. The world is a better place with Zero Hedge in it. There is a non-trivial amount of damage done here simply by shining a light on the agenda of our oligarchs and plutocrats. And as Marla indicated, threats of violence in the comments may actually make it more difficult to do what this site does so well.
I stand firmly in support of this policy.
Very well said.
I lost a lot of respect for this site just now.
Type all you want. Bitch all you want. Ain't gonna make a lick of difference.
I'm guessing most of the Founding Fathers would have been kicked off of here and called lunatics about 3 months ago.
Sad.
Most of the founding fathers would have been smart enough to not post it here... Or *anywhere* on the Internet.
I'm Ron Paul.
My friend, I have read that someone should go "fuck themself with a dead child from [another country]." I can't even repeat the specifics.
I have read that bankers should be barbequed and eaten.
I have read things many nearly as bad as these examples.
If you don't like minimal standards of civilty and sanity, then don't post.
I have been waiting for this day. Thank you.
My personal favorite was a comment on a gold post...
Getting gold using a 30-06 against a suburban or something.
Captcha maybe needs two equations and two unknowns for the lurking Anons out there.
The comment quality has dropped to AOL chat room levels.
"If you don't like minimal standards of civilty and sanity, then don't post.
I have been waiting for this day."
+1K
I've never understood why "Anon" commentors don't have to wait on the porch.....
(Speaking of "Anon commentors", what's up w/this site lately? I haven't been ablt to log in to my account for the past two days.
Tyler: Do registered users get sent back to the porch after a period of inactivity?)
Rula
seriously, you can criticize policy all you want, you can criticize behavior, the only restriction is you can't threaten bodily harm or violence -- is that really that hard? If the only way you can effectively "discuss" something is through the lens of violence than that is a serious statement on the mental state of our world.
This policy is not only accurate, it should be commended.
well said. the man who answered first in this thread is a patriot and is a warrior. many have lost the real and true meaning of the warrior class because it has purposely been bred out of them in the last 60 years or so. to wit, take the ft hood instance. here we have a bunch of young mostly white men, almost all of them probably veterans standing around and getting shot up and then they are rescued by the brave woman. i submit that is bullshit and that there was more than one shooter that day and that the nice lady cop didn't do what they say she did. also the muslim major is just a patsi and a chump de jour for them, but whatever. we have seen this before. shall we go back to that day in iraq when the convoy that jessica lynch was in made that wrong turn and drove behind the lines. they made up this whole story about her and that she fought to the last bullet, etc. this was of course all lies. her injuries were acquired because she had a wreck in her vehicle and not because she was fighting hard to save her helpless comrades. give me a break already. then after a time, being disgusted with living the lie, she recanted and said it was all a big lie made up by the war department. why do they do things like this? they want the men, and the true target is white men, white european men, to be weak and feel helpless and if you notice they have achieved their multi cultural feel good touchy feely goals almost one hundred percent. so that now when a mastadon comes out of his cave and says something, no one understands it because there are not many who speak that way anymore. such is life here now. in spirit i agree mostly with what he is saying really. frankly i can live without the sexist comments, but that is just me. God made woman to walk by the man's side, not behind him. We are true partners in life, not equal but body but equal in spirit. having said all of that i will conclude and say this. i agree with the statements of the need for severe violence , but i do so in my mind and in my spirit and my heart at this time. many and i do mean there have been many times when i stopped and erased my true feelings on such matters mainly because i don't want a visit in the middle of the night by the goon squad. but there is coming a time soon, when we shall be forced by force to stop saying such things and we shall be declared to be enemies of the state. right now, they are attempting to figure out ways to find out what you are thinking, as you walk in airports etc. this is madness and extremely dangerous. trust me when i say this, but i am the nicest guy you would ever want to meet, but i have to ask when is enough , enough? the founding fathers would love zerohedge. but they would go to the next level in so many ways, it would be astounding. their freedom of speech would totally put us all to shame with its shear lucidity. for the last few months, i have been coasting as it were, being laid back, not really getting turned on by much. then it happened. a friend of mine, after 4 years of working on her is finally having a epiphany of sorts about what is really going on. she is asking many questions now and i have many answers for her to think on and to study. it turned my switch back on now. it rekindled the fire inside of me, the fire that has been quiet embers now for a while. this fire inside of the patriot burns day and night. you must know this. truth is truth. it is a terrible thing but it is also a blessing. i wish it were that all of us knew the truth. but we don't. i love this land and this country and this people. the time is short now. May God in His Infinite Mercy give us grace and peace and understanding in these last days and may He help us fight the fight as He did in the first revolution. my salutation to you all is this. butch up, gird up, ruck up and get your asses together. judgement day is coming folks. you are either part of the solution or part of the problem. this evil that is being perpetrated on this country and its people cannot last. it must not last. it will not last......
i choose to believe that you have a deep understanding of what is going on a psychic level and i happen to agree with you on that point. with that said, what is the appropriate response when enough is enough?
does violent revolution really change things for the better? does not violence make one the enemy in which one fights? look at this country for example. we have become everything that the 'founders' fought against. taxation without representation with those taxes being used predominantly to fund industries that profit from destruction, fear & control. now is the answer more destruction while our children have to hide in fear while the adults go around killing each other?
martin armstrong in his latest recounts Black Friday 1869 when bankers were hung from streetlights in downtown manhattan. did that outpouring of violence create any meaningful change? 4 years later there was another panic. Garfield, who investigated the 1869 panic was assassinated 4 months into his presidency. aren't you tired of continually being a pawn by the forces of history?
i have nothing against the 2nd amendment. i personally feel the genius of the 2nd amendment is that there is no need to make any overt threats of violent revolution, as the protection is already implied in the text. what did teddy say, 'speak softly and carry a big fuckin stick'?
perhaps thinking there is a solution is a major part of the problem?
god is dead - too bad humanity still thinks hes around and like to war with each other over whose prophet is cooler..
Or which tribe holds the true God, faithful to that particular tribe.
God is certainly not dead, consider the following:
2 Peter 3:8 & 9
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, NOT WANTING ANYONE TO PERISH, but everyone to come to repentance.
The Parable of the Weeds
Matthew 13; 24-29
24Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.
27"The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'
28" 'An enemy did this,' he replied.
"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'
29" 'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' "
This is just my opinion by I think the bankers might be "Weeds", but let's not uproot them and leave that to God.
That does seem accurate for today's patriots all right. I never thought much of the word "patriot" anyways--too loaded a term, too overcome with statist groupthink.
Hate to say it but this was sort of rambling. Rather than question the finer points (I get the gist of it) I wonder: are we still allowed to leeway for sarcasm and satire? Cuz if not then, well, I'm out of a job here.
I am Chumbawamba.
Didn't a judge recently rule the Constitution was unconstitutional? Or am I making a physic prediction?
Please don't fire Mr. Wamba or Mr. Bastard. Viva la ZH.
I am Chumbawhatnot (aka Dr. Horace Manure)
People,
This has everything to do with this: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/09/taking_liberties/entry5595506.sh...
And this: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/more-attacks-online-free-speech-justice...
And if you think for a nanosecond that ZH, TD, or luscious Marla will lift a well-manicured finger to defend you against the black clad, jack-booted so-and-so's when you incriminate yourself to such an egregious degree, you're smoking more than green shoots.
It's time to grow up. There is no presumption of privacy online. Get over it, behave responsibly, and preserve the (remnants) of the 4th estate for the rest of us.
-- I am not Chumbawumba, but I play him on TV
great points, but ZH, TD and Marla just took the "well-manicured finger" to defend us in that Marla is setting the record straight that true violent threats conveyed here WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.
And for all those critics of Marla's warning, I think you are missing the forest for the trees.
I concur completely.
I was not criticizing Marla or ZH. I was simply pointing out the forest for the sake of the tree gazers who seem to think that they have a right to show a$$ as they please, then rely upon site owners to shield their nakedness.
this confirms that the united states is dead.
"In spite of the unceasing efforts made by men in power to conceal this and to ascribe a different meaning to power, power is the application of a rope, a chain by which a person will be bound and dragged along, or of a whip, with which he will be flogged, or of a knife, or an ax with which they will cut off his hands, feet, ears, head—an application of these means or the threat they will be used. Thus it was in the time of Nero and of Ghenghis Khan and thus it is even now, in the most liberal of governments."
Leo Tolstoy
I sense the iron fist of power has made itself known to ZH.
The chilling effect has begun.
"If all you're goin' on is my confession, forget it, I'm simply not credible." DG
Well said. Also, racist remarks (I've seen a bunch here) don't help much either. There's a great deal of wit expressed on this site, most of it on topic, a lot of it insightful and informative. The Internet, alas, is an open channel for anonymous psychotic raving, and that's another thing I've learned, a little bit here and much more at other places on the 'Net - there's just a whole lot deranged thinking out there. Forewarned is forearmed, I guess. Anyway, I do hope zerohedge has zerotolerance for advocating any form of violence.
+10
Frankly I think it muddles the focus.
@Rozzo Think i'm gonna go play some Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 2 if that's o.k.? You won't be offended will you?
+10,000 on no racist remarks... they have no place on ZH.
Does this have anything to do with ACTA and it's imminent passage? Under the guise of cleaning up the bickering and the "fuck you lloyd" (That's a keeper at any expense) type banter. I ask in regard to the various document postings and subsequent questioning of origination.
the Decleration of Independence preceded the Constitution......
Nobody signed e declaration as "anonymous"
Mark Felt didn't make a bad choice as the Anonymous "Deep Throat". I'd say the channel worked well for our country. There's a lesson there about checking the bath water . Maybe you should reuse the grey water on your tender plants first and see if there's live wiggles.
I'm square with all the above (Just as long as we can still call bankers "Douchebags")
I have no problems calling any of my friends a douchebag, but I would never go so low as calling them a banker.
Marla's right. Don't get all frothy in your comments. Either do. Or don't do.
People who are bearish take enough crap as it is. So, I agree with keeping it clean because the powers that be don't need anymore reasons to be smug and claim they are doing God's work.
What about threatening to piss on a liberal politician? Can I get away with that?
Nice to see rules being set, it makes perfect sense. How will you keep the anons from breaking the rules though?
you ban the IP itself ... problem solved ..
Except for the problem of dynamically assigned IP's, spoofed IP's, blocked IP's, etc...
Here ya go, I can fix that for you.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=open+http+proxies
I would never hang a douchebag banker. Rope is far too dear a commodity. And its derivatives and fraud laced derivatives-squared will feed me for a generation.
Therefore douchebag bankers are conditional to my greater ease and luxury.
But if I can create a synthetic douchebag banker...or just get the market to believe i have one...
The Clinton administration instituted Echelon via the NSA. To my knowledge, the program is operational. Seems like the legal staff at ZH has been engaged in some "terse" conversations with the "authorities".
Wait for that knock on the door in the middle of the night.
Didn't Jason Bourne shut that program down?
haha +10
I've often wondered how many "National Security Letters" ZH has received.
They most certainly have received at least one, and they are precluded from saying a word about it.
Makes you wonder.
So, is it ok to say that the FED should be demolished because it's in an architectural disaster reminicient of Third Reich aesthetic and that their eagles remind me of another marketing icon of Nazi Germany. That Ben Bernanke should be placed in Fashion jail for having exceptionally poor taste in clothes and accused of hiding a hairlip in an exceptionally manicured mustache and beard? And he lisps like Cindy Brady on Jagermeister?
Poor Cindy Brady on Jagermeister wouldn't destroy the dollar. And it's harelip, not the other (just because they seek to cover god's mark with beardery).
I think truth will serve as your defense.
Erm..What were the first 4 rules?
cocoablini
You have me ROFLMAO, spewing high quality Islay Scotch through my nose.
You owe me big $$ dude. STOP IT.
"Cindy Brady on Jagermeister"
Oh my freakin' lord....
Censor that!
Feeling the Prickley heat in our crotchial area??? From ummmmm I don't know...Beelbezub??
receipe for Kentucky Fried Bankers: Support Obama and his " got socialist everything" agenda. Nationalise banks...make it GovMart, GovSachs, GovMotors, GovSoft, GovHedge....Blaze the house...rat will die with it.
Good idea, Support Obama, it is the only viable option we have. Socialism is not such a bad thing, especially if you are on the bottom of society which is about 90% of the US.
Would the restriction on calls for violence also cover calls for a legitimate government (which, by definition, has a monopoly over legitimate violence) to statutorily enact a capital punishment for a specific future crime?
LOLOLOLOLOL..... dying here. LaPhraoig is wasted again.
So explain to me again how due process works when the people who are supposed to enforce due process are utterly corrupt and lacking in any principles other than loot as much as possible from the sinking ship.
Please explain yourself!
Are you speaking about due processes in the United State of America or due processes in Mother Russia?
That was not a reference to anyone in political power or currently involved in the banking industry...... yes it was.
good call. sure don't want the Secret Service shutting this place down like they did to the Rage Against the Machine forums back in 2001 because some asshat posted something containing the phrase 'kill bush'.
You just posted the phrase, "kill bush." Ahhhhh!
I've been looking for advice on how to get rid of my privet. I kill the bush and it just keeps coming back...and I didn't even elect it.
(The judges mumble amongst themselves, the crowd is hushed, awaiting their final decision).
Nair hair removal works great.
Seriously? Nair kills privet? I've got it sprouting up all over the freakin' place and it just shrugs off RoundUp.
If "RoundUp" or gyphosate don't kill what you call privet, you ought to try finding out that it's not privet or use the 48% now called super concentrate stuff to start.
MsCreant, what are you willing to go through remains the point of this and some of our other conversations. I am sure you'll remember that we are guests here as much as a community within society. Thank you for the reminder as to why I feel fortunate as to my gender and my choice of profession away from the porn industry.
All My Best
You said porn.
I rather thought that is what modern finance had become. Porn without the prophylaxis the rule of law should provide to all with favor to none.
Where do you direct violence in a world gone mad?
There are those who can’t see.
There are many more who won’t.
There are some who see and only vent.
There are a few who see and resist.
There are some who see and lose it.
This IS what we have to work with.
that's an excellent question.
if you're in england, there's always scrap club:
http://www.scrapclub.co.uk/
Understood, it's imperative that blogosphere journalism remain a reputable source on news certainly not found in MSM.
Hear, hear. As always, well said Marla.
Stop calling bankers douchbags, it's an insult to douchbags.
Bankers are not refreshing, agreed. Though did you know douchebags actaully are bad? They promote imbalances in the flora and fauna ecology of the tissues in question. Natural is better. Bankers are not natural. Hmmm...need another judgement call here...
So recommendations for legal procedure against certain individuals and the suggested sentence is nice and borderline? If you don't mind I'll just stay on the border here. Can see better from this perspective.
This bears repeating: violence is only the answer when survival is the question. The method for achieving justice is the truth...it is the same means the villains use: words, in writing or spoken. Influence in government will unfortunately be necessary, since we have democracy we might as well use it. These things are actually obvious to most people, but I guess there are a few folks for whom zh provides therapy. I would kindly suggest that this therapy is conducted someplace else, because it is not helping solve the source of its necessity here.
Very well said TD. It would be good for everyone to consider that our laws and their interpretation are constantly changing... especially in the areas of the Internet and blogging... so this position embraced by ZH allows the greatest protection to all who post here. Many of us are professionals and would likely not want to deal with some rouge prosecutor or AG over something we posted that was laden with too much expressive emotion which could incite violence. Additionally, should that ever occur then ZH could also find themselves in some hot water if they had not taken some prior action to convey the proper instructions and expectations to their posters, and perhaps remove posters that cross the line.
Agreed, well said. This isn't therapy, it's education. There is some acceptable therapy here, knowing others see the problems, feel the frustration, desire the change. It's a first step and the most important. Violence will only derail the journey. And, it would give them what they want, a diversion.
Can we air a modest proposal to solve both Irish overpopulation and a lack of protein in English diets?
The pen is mightier than the sword. Yet, our representation in Washington must understand that there is a higher law. It is their authority that was priviledged by us.
We are all obligated by our vested rights as human beings to act with diligence in a right and just manner even when that action contradicts the law of a country. When a system denigrates to the point of clearly corrupt unfairness, then we have the moral authority to address said wrong either by intralegal or extralegal means-whatever it takes.
Those who wish to exercise their higher moral extralegal rights are best advised to do so more carefully than by spouting eminent threats of harm on a blog.
The revolutionary sentiment in this country is stronger now than at anytime since the Vietnam War. If we can constructively and patiently channel this sentiment into a growing majority, the system will respond. It will take some time and committment. There will always be time to take up the pitchforks if need be. Face it, there is nowhere truly safe for them to hide, and they know it.
Honey pot is what Michael Ruppert calls it. Enemies of your movement ruin it by infecting it with garbage posters. It's the same as cops dressing as violent anarchists and instilling violence at a protest.
BINGO!
there is no "movement" per se.
I think this is true. An abuse link next to posts could help users flag posts of questionable content.
yes, excellent point
We only need about 10K people (maybe less) to bring down GS or the federal reserve. It's a tiny fraction of the US population.
10K people show up and protest in front of 85 Broadway (GS headquarters) or in front of the federal reserve building and block the entrance and not let employees get through. Most of the protesters will get arrested. But they will be released the next day. The protester's most powerful weapon is non-violent civil disobedience.
What will succeed is the tenacity of the protesters. If you get arrested and released the next day, you get right back to protesting the next day. They will hold people in jail for longer period of time if this continues. But keep going. 10K people taking turns sitting down in front of the federal reserve demanding that it be dismantled. More people will join in if they watch it on TV.
I bet it will take less than one months of daily protests and blocking of entrances and massive arrests and GS/Fed will be forced to shut down. But critical mass must be reached. There has to be enough people blocking the entrance and creating massive chaos so that even if the police where there to carry people way it will take all day and nobody will be able to get through.
George Orwell
Please and Thank You go a long ways also.
The path is made by walking on it. I don't see your sign saying I am George Orwell where's my other 9,999 on TV. You need to be there first before your dream of the other 9,999 will materialize.
It worked very well for ACORN???
Yes, obvious answer. There is no possible way that a modern company could operate without physical access to its workspace in this day and age. Especially one which deals in the abstract notions of currency and property using computers and high-speed communications devices.
Also, there is absolutely no possible f*ing way anyone could simply create a new company called silverman-bags, completely independently, while coincidentally hiring many of the highest performers, to create "innovative solutions for credit f*ckall bs".
Completely foolproof.
GOLD BITCHES!!!
I am Chumbawamba.
As funny as it might be, this shit is serious. Do you really want to martyr yourself for an internet joke/jab? I'm content to just read this stuff, but I'm taking a break to try and help convey some common sense to you retards out there taking pot shots.
Your IP resolves to a server farm in Sweden, whose IP block also contains wikileaks. Like everything else about ZH, I'm very impressed by your exacting taste and good judgment. And rest assured, I would do absolutely nothing to tarnish it.
If you are from Sweden, I will help you with your rücksack.
Marla,
As an attorney, I must suggest you not refer to "due process" in making this appeal to Zero Hedge readers. Constitutional due process can only be infringed by government action, NOT by anything a private party can do, period. It is even more questionable, it seems to me, when one invokes denial of due process against contemplated activity of any sort. Fortunately, people are not generally prosecuted (yet) for contemplated activities, and must take affirmative steps toward execution of the described action, before "authorities" may step in.
Of course, you might simply state that discussion of violence, however idly undertaken, will not be tolerated as it simply violates ZH policy.
That is all you need to do. The minimum necessary to correct the problem. Even the government knows that much.
I think in the context of a government-overthrowing revolution involving the mass-hanging of bankers, it is legitimate to point out that some due process (and note that I referred to due process in general and then cited its presence in the Constitution rather than invoking Constitutional due process directly) might be a good idea.
At what point does a mass popular movement become burdened with the responsibility of due process?I'm not exactly sure how the fact that Constitutional due process protections in the United States apply only to government action negates the standard that the ideal of due process is a goodthing™.
c.f. Interstate stalking statutes and state clones thereof and the (mostly civil) liability that has, on occasion, attached to ISPs in such cases.
I can envision a future where we can vote for bills from our computers by petitioning our congressmen from home as a way to a means, Imagine millions of citizens unaffected by lobbyist rants and money actually making changes from their hearts ,.What year? 2068 comes to mind.
Due process can be both a sword and a shield. The Kelo folks found that all the crossed-t's and dotted-i's could be used to rob them of their homes. SLAPP suits use due process to silence dissent. The Fed's activities can be covert and hazardous because it uses due process to fob off its critics.
But this due process also can be used the other way -- one cannot be hauled off to jail for advocating Austrian economics; FOIA requests, after sufficient time to make them moot, eventually can be more-or-less filled.
So due process is merely a tool or technique, neither good nor bad within itself. It gains moral standing by its use in moral causes. Similarly, a gun isn't a libertarian or totalitarian gun, but may be valued by libertarians or totalitarians depending on its use.
"Let's hang all the bankers" doesn't become any more palatable if it is stated as: "let's have a trial and some appeals, then hang all the bankers."
Mind you, "let's meet at O'Malley's next Tuesday, have a couple of drinks, then find a banker or two to string up at Elm Avenue and Zymurgy street" has serious problems with legality [and, please God, let there be no town with an O'Malley's bar near a banking center at Elm and Zymurgy] -- and with common sense, as it discusses a specific potentially criminal act in a public forum. But due process is the least of its problems.
Due process comes after the Mob calms down... and that ain't going to happen until the Mob vents it's frustration(id est hanging bankers)
Marla,
I, having scribed one of the quotes in question, understand and respect the position you feel you must take on this matter. My comment was born of frustration and a lingering anger over a recent encounter with a person of the institution I mentioned. And it's regrettable that it was one of the comments that has given birth to this now seemingly endless thread. It takes time and focus away from the kind of information and discourse I come to ZH for. However, I must admit that I'm surprised at the momentum this thread has gathered and I think that momentum has much to do with the fact that the tone often expressed on ZH never gave me (and I suspect many others) any reason to believe that my comments (or any of the others that were pointed out) would be taken "literally". And while I'm on the subject of the quotes, I must point out that what I said and is presented in the "Fifth rule..." section is not accurately quoted, although I will admit it captures the spirit of the intent. I understand the impact value of presenting it in that way as it drives home the point of it's inappropriateness. But it was far from the entirety of the point being made.
All that said, I will proceed with greater caution in future postings. I think you (the entire ZH gang) have built something wonderful here and I do not want to do anything to diminish that. Perhaps all I wanted to say in my original post I could have said more gracefully with the following:
"If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle."
Fredrick Douglas
Peace Marla. I hope all remains well.
As an attorney, you should be aware of all manner of thoughtcrime legislation that's either been attempted, succeeded, or in the works, for example:
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=4682
do you really think this stuff is going to go away?
its true, its true. what about two weeks ago and the hate crimes bill that got passed?
can you help me get rid of some credit card debt?
signed,
gordon gekko