So based on the +insightfuls and +informatives in this thread so far, the consensus seems to be boo twitter for moderating its users. On slashdot. Which moderates its users and buries spam/flamebait. If anyone bothered to have the level of interest on this site to follow its users around from thread to thread and reply to whatever they say with irrelevant screeds, slander, and so on i'd wager there'd be a bit more 'Hey what the hell mods, do something' and/or people quitting the site. Which is precisely what's occurring on twitter. If I follow a journalist on twitter and I bother to look at the comments and see some nazibots posting nazi crap I never want to read again - b/c I have no interest/regard for their opinion and really...who has time for that shit- me hitting that block/mute button is no different from filtering comments on slashdot for +1 or higher. And when that nazibot creates a new account/bot just to do the same again to circumvent their deserved ban, mute/block doesn't really matter much does it? And yes that's a significant problem on twitter today 2-12-17 that makes the experience on that site much shittier.

In summation, a whole lot of people on /. saying they want unfettered discussion while bitching on a very fettered discussion forum. So get out there ya wild, anti-SJW cowboys and create that unmoderated website, see how long it lasts, best of luck to you. I gather it'll resemble an unpatched PHP board from 2002 in no time but hey, yay freedom of speech right?

How this is modded up insightful while lacking so much insight, I have no clue.

Hop in the wayback machine to early 2011, Libyan people are in the streets of just about every major city in that country -- and not because Hillary asked them to -- fighting for the future of their country and Qaddafi is brutally disposing of them. Unlike Egypt, the military by and large is not standing down and continues to slaughter protesters- both the peaceful ones, and the very outgunned insurrectionists. Qaddafi is disliked basically everywhere in the world minus the few dictators he's helped prop up, so it can't be a surprise that the UN Security Council (again - not under Hillary's control) adopted a no-fly zone. Right after that US, France, and UK bomb the bastard - so its almost comical that you could squint and attribute any of this to Clinton. At the same table would be her peers in France & UK, Pentagon, intel depts, not to mention her superiors. While some may have disagreed with the approach (Gates), the State Dept was one voice out of many in the decision, and far from the most powerful. Here's an article arguing why it was the right decision, find a way to disagree with it without shooting the messenger/writing it off http://www.vox.com/2016/4/5/11...

Place yourself in State/CIA/Pentagon at the time in 2011 and you're faced with this situation what do you do? Do nothing and face criticism that you stood by while people were surely slaughtered (see Syria). Do something and slashdot posters will whine that you couldn't wave a magic wand and tidy up the effects of 30 years of bad governance by a depraved dictator with a nice ribbon. Or worse believe/espouse you've conjured the war from thin air for your own profit. The world doesn't work that way, no matter how many action movies portray it as such.

Another absurd statement - that Qaddafi was warming to the west. The only way/reason he did so was to save his own ass - same with a variety of other awful aholes we share intel with (Bashir in Sudan comes to mind). He's first to call after 9/11 - only so that we wouldn't blast him to kingdom come at the thought that the same guy responsible for Lockerbie was at it again. Dropped his nuke program - only after seeing Saddam's regime disposed of in 100 hours. Opened up oil trade because his country was crumbling. To say relations were warming is like saying its not quite as cold in the summer in Antarctica.

Next up - the issue people have with Trump re: nukes - that the man can't contain himself when he's irritated, let alone outright threatened and that is a pretty good reason to be concerned. North Korea issues us threats as part of their weekly newsletters, how would he respond to that? He ain't the pope. He tries to sound like a tough guy on the campaign trail, so you can't be surprised a lot of people don't share your confidence that he's a peaceful guy. Adding to that he's gone on record that he'd allow (encourage?) Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia to arm themselves with nukes. What could possibly go wrong? It'd be like giving a couple of drunks shouting at each other outside a bar a couple of pistols. Tacitly stupid.

For that matter various despots and oligarchs that have their dough hidden in various ways and/or use state funds as their personal piggy banks. See House of Saud, Putin, the Khalifas, Mubarak and so on.

What a load of FUD. Without citing any evidence, this guy gets modded up to a +5 insightful, GGs slashdot. Clearly OP spent zero time looking at the papers before posting. https://panamapapers.icij.org/... sort by country and find your Nigerian.

A simpler explanation than the OP's conspiracy: someone that pays their fair share in taxes sees a litany of billionaires and millionaires not paying their fair share and/or pillaging already impoverished nations and has the wherewithal to expose that.

What would OP do in the leaker's shoes and had access to this information? Sit on it?

Just take CBS as the foremost example. 60 Minutes, Face the Nation, the more serious daily morning wake-up news- arguably the most credible news lineup of the major networks. But they put ex-CIA guys on editorial payroll- Mike Morell & John Miller. Charlie Rose has been carrying so much water for the anti-Apple and anti-Snowden people for the past year, you'd think he was on their payroll too. These guys are allowed on a regular basis to plead the government case with nary a whiff of contrasting opinion. The pro-encryption, limited govmt surveillance side gets barely a squeak in relative to the barrage of threatening ex-spooks warning of ever-present encryption-toting boogeymen. In general, the media has become stenographers for government mouthpieces who frame the debate and mold the news cycle while questioning authority has become verboten since that loses access to sources. It can't be surprising that the general public has had their opinion shaped the way it has when the debate is framed by technophobic dinosaurs & J. Edgar Hoover's torch-bearers. It had to be Apple that finally took a stand - if it were Samsung, ATT, Google, anybody else- the debate would be even more lopsided than it already is. Praise be to Tim Cook for picking up the fight where Lavabit couldn't.

More than half of americans that can be contacted by Pew, never bothered to add themselves to Do Not Call lists, have the time to answer surveys and don't mind giving their opinions to a stranger that called them unprompted. A full half of respondents had a landline - so half might as well be labeled as techno-illiterates whose opinion is as relevant to the matter at hand as Nebraskan's opinions on California nude beach policies.

Think you mean Washingon Times, the Post is pretty middle of the road.

L.A. in of itself can be a very isolating, soul-stealing place, let alone when you move into a manor such as his (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZhM56v9UVQ). Status obsessed vapid and shallow social climbers, hangers-on abound. Move to Brooklyn. Eat good food, be around people that don't care who you are, find a nice lady thats a better person than you. Buy a banana hat in TF2,live happily ever after. Just a proposal.

Why not just add more archivists? Problem solved.