KiA2 MetaFour Fast Facts from Domitius Of Massilia

submitted by DomitiusOfMassilia⬛[M] from self.KotakuInAction

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Far_Side_of_ForeverOption 4 alum 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

K, now that I'm here, two requests:

  1. What is the breadth allowed speech on this platform? Roughly the same as reddit, wider?

  2. I thought I had a handle on this whistleblower thing. Clearly I do not. Why is everyone losing their lunch over Ciaramella? This clamping down may not be as immediate as the Zoe post was, but once the engine started, it's been just as sudden. I was under the impression that people generally like whistleblowers, with the exception of those who suggest that Snowden is a traitor

[–]DomitiusOfMassilia⬛[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

1) Wider by a lot. I don't have official rules set up here, but suffice it to say, don't be surprised if you get shocked by something offensive over the coming week or so. The biggest restriction is that the site does not allow porn, nor copyright violating material. My advice would be to, for the moment, think of it as Reddit, but with less stupid harassment rules.

2) Ciaramella is a problem generally because many people believed that he was a lynch-pin in fostering collusion between the FBI, the CIA, the DNC, Obama's National Security Council, and a Ukrainian "Anti-Corruption" organization that was directly tasked with fabricating the Steele Dossier, and trying to destroy Paul Manafort in order to collapse the Trump campaign in 2016. He was previously released from the CIA for leaking information to the press, was later re-hired along with policy changes that suggest to some people he was hired explicitly for the purposes of leaking information. He was in contact with Adam Schiff before he filed his complaint.

Basically, the dude is absolutely dirty, and could implicate a huge number of people.

The problem that most people are having with the coverage of the whistleblower is that he is a public figure who has been identified by Politico, The New York Times, and RealClear Investigations and a whole host of other journalists and media organizations. The largest left-wing media organizations (MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, WaPo, Salon, Slate, etc) have all worked together to entirely remove any mention of his name in public to "protect his identity" although his name has already been publicly released. The mainstream media is intentionally suppressing news stories. That's what people are upset about.

[–]Far_Side_of_ForeverOption 4 alum 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

  1. Sounds fine. I miss the untamed wild west of the internet

  2. Very detailed, thank you. I already figured out what the little people down on the ground are upset about; this blatant suppression has been both sloppy and insulting. I worded the question poorly; I was more wondering why the powers-that-be were going apeshit over this, especially with the outlets you listed on KiA2 who have released the name

From my perspective, it'd be like, foe example, if our overlords decided that Charlie Sheen is a problem and began suppressing all information and mention of him. We already know who is he, what he's done and what he's said; why bother at this point?

[–]DomitiusOfMassilia⬛[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I was more wondering why the powers-that-be were going apeshit over this, especially with the outlets you listed on KiA2 who have released the name

My hypothesis is that Mark Zaid, the whistleblower's attorney, is probably sending out threatening letters to corporations that publish Eric's information. Add that Schiff and others are (falsely) claiming that reproducing the whistleblower's name opens corporations up to legal liability, and may violate the law.

Being that this confirms their biases, they will fold quickly under pressure.

[–]Far_Side_of_ForeverOption 4 alum 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And I imagine that, if Zaid's tactic here does not work within the legal framework, reddit will neither rescind the new rule, nor reinstate communities that go under due to this

All part of the plan

[–]DomitiusOfMassilia⬛[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Correct.

[–]Guyven 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

To your second point:

First, whistleblower identity protections are entirely for protecting that person's employment. The identity itself is not protected, just the assurance of job security. This fucker was fired long ago (for leaking), so he gets none of that. However (and critically) his identity being a secret is important to the intended narrative (who is he, someone close to things, his life is being threatened, he was a casual bystander, he's definitely not a biased witness by any means, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain).

Second, this is a flex. The established powers of media, bureaucracy, and politics are utilizing their ability to make something so merely by claiming it to be. This is why Trump is guilty of something Biden did. This is why Obama was a scandal free president. This is why Epstein definitely committed suicide and had a closer relationship with Trump than with Bill Clinton.

Frankly it is all a gambit. They've had great, to middling, to mild success over many years of crafting a narrative and having it parroted endlessly. I can't predict where the public's stomach for obvious lies ends, but we're reaching it. Pepe and OK signs don't stir the entire nation like a political coup being televised uncritically.

[–]Far_Side_of_ForeverOption 4 alum 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly what I was looking for. Fanks, guv