Reuters suspends editor for conspiring with Anonymous

[stonehart]

Only the rich are allowed to steal from the poor, not the other way around. Pull a prank on a former employer that's a huge conglomerate and be prepared for decades in jail and exorbitant fines; bankers plunder a world economy, no biggie.

 

[Randall]

There's an old saying ... Two wrongs don't make a right. Are the consequences also unfair? Who said life is fair? If you're not prepared to deal with the consequences, then don't break the rules.

 

[stonehart]

There's an old saying ... Two wrongs don't make a right. Are the consequences also unfair? Who said life is fair? If you're not prepared to deal with the consequences, then don't break the rules.

Its not about fair from where I stand it is about what is happening.

And if it were just about right or wrong and break the rules then pay the price then the cartoon above would not be such a stark reality.

I have no problem with those who work hard for their money and success because that is to be applauded, and overall these sorts of people tend to put back into the community etc.

No my problem is with those that would seek to take every thing they can by any means they can caring not for the lives destroyed as long as they can have all the money they want at the expense of everyone else. No life is not fair but in the case of the bankers the deck is well stacked in their favor (in fact they own the deck).

Face it the vast amount of traders and bankers are little more than parasites when you get down to how they actually make money but I digress.

These people care not if they break laws, hell they are the people writing the laws these days by proxy.

So two wrongs don't make a right? sure but really it is a matter of degree of scale ... young guy punks a corp.. or banking corp steal's along with other ones the collective wealth of the western world by questionable moral means then sticks their collective hands out for the public to pay their party tab, while the mainstream media plays along with this to cast a positive light on why those that caused the collapse should be the ones to be bailed out of it (hey got to help their pay masters).

So we get to this young guy in the video, should he have done what he did? No in fact he should not have and I am a former anon saying that.

But should he be looking at many years in prison and a massive fine the combination of which will more or less destroy his life.. all for what? well for what amounts to spray painting an anarchy sign on the fount door of a building.

On the other hand we have high powered bankers and traders that have stolen billions from the people of this world that get ... wait for it ... a bonus, a bale out, and prison time of none.

Two wrongs don't make a right... yeah for sure.... but which act has caused more pain, suffering, suicide, and general destruction? punking a website? of fucking the world over?

Your choice.

 

[Muadib]

Well said Stonehart.

 

[Randall]

Its not about fair from where I stand it is about what is happening. And if it were just about right or wrong and break the rules then pay the price then the cartoon above would not be such a stark reality ...

I've seen Smartest Guys In The Room, Client 9, and a few more movies expose what you're talking about. There's no shortage of hypocritical double standards based on connections, money and political power an/or favoritism. From Banking to Commodity Futures to whatever else has big money involved, it seems there are very few good guys left. By good guys I mean those who consider how their actions might negatively affect others and take a reasonable amount of responsibility for that.

I also find it unfortunate that while we're focused on the biggest fish there is an even larger mass of the same garbage going on in smaller businesses that affect even more people in a real way and on a daily basis. It takes the form of eroding the rights of common everyday working people by making employers into their own little fiefdoms where the worst they get for breaking labor standards or human rights laws ( if you can even prove it ) is a meaningless fine, while the employees stand to lose everything. I'm no big fan of unions, but at the same time, we wouldn't need unions if management weren't so corrupt and self-serving. The trend toward wide-scale corporate, fascist, dictatorial, authoritarian rule of the population is IMO a greater threat to society at large than a few big fish that got away ... not that they deserve to get away ... but it's taken the focus off our immediate relevant daily challenge within our closer communities.

 

[stonehart]

I've seen Smartest Guys In The Room, Client 9, and a few more movies expose what you're talking about. There's no shortage of hypocritical double standards based on connections, money and political power an/or favoritism. From Banking to Commodity Futures to whatever else has big money involved, it seems there are very few good guys left. By good guys I mean those who consider how their actions might negatively affect others and take a reasonable amount of responsibility for that.

I also find it unfortunate that while we're focused on the biggest fish there is an even larger mass of the same garbage going on in smaller businesses that affect even more people in a real way and on a daily basis. It takes the form of eroding the rights of common everyday working people by making employers into their own little fiefdoms where the worst they get for breaking labor standards or human rights laws ( if you can even prove it ) is a meaningless fine, while the employees stand to lose everything. I'm no big fan of unions, but at the same time, we wouldn't need unions if management weren't so corrupt and self-serving, and the trend toward wide-scale corporate, fascist, dictatorial, authoritarian rule of the population is IMO a greater threat to society at large than a few big fish that got away ... not that they deserve to get away ... but it's taken the focus off our immediate relevant daily challenge within our closer communities.

Absolutely no argument from me about this for it is the simple truth.

Occupy Wall Street failed for many reasons none of which I wish to go into here, but what I am seeing is the same pressure cooker situation that caused that level of anger to end up in the streets building again. It is a matter of time, the problem is how will it play out and into who's hands will it play?

 

[Randall]

Absolutely no argument from me about this for it is the simple truth.
Occupy Wall Street failed for many reasons none of which I wish to go into here, but what I am seeing is the same pressure cooker situation that caused that level of anger to end up in the streets building again. It is a matter of time, the problem is how will it play out and into who's hands will it play?

Yes, it's too bad about the occupy movement. If they only had a more unified and focused approach perhaps it would have had more impact, and it's a shame that some of the shady tactics to oppress it have gone largely unreported. Former co-host here DB on his show Angry Human also makes some good points on that. Still, despite all that, if I were to agree to be employed by a company in good faith and as part of that agreement not disclose company secrets, including passwords to company computers, they could count on me to keep my end of the bargain. That isn't to say that if there were some legal reason, such as a criminal investigation that required me to give them up, that I might not do it. But even then I would need to see some evidence other than the mere threat of legal action that it was morally justifiable to break my promise, or my cooperation would only be done under protest.