|
On December 08 2010 04:58 Whiladan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 04:54 Phantasy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:50 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 04:48 Phantasy wrote:
So whats up with guys who get banned on tl.net forums and no one stands up for their freedom of speech? This is a web-forum, not the U.S.A. Point being, they are different animals and follow a different set of rules and expectations. Freedom of speech is not a right on a privately-owned web-forum.. My apologies. I thought there was continuity in ethics and expectations. I guess you can say that I don't care what you say since your online and posting documents online, but then say its okay if I'm standing next to you in Britain. You win, bro. No, I don't care what you say if you're on a forum or if you're standing right next to me. Freedom of speech is not the right to say what you want without criticism or that everyone must listen to you and take you seriously regardless of their own opinions. I'm not trying to personally attack you, just helping you understand the difference between the real world and a privately owned website.
OH.. cool, thanks for the explanation. So whats up with the guys who get banned on tl.net forums and no one stands up for their freedom of speech? (no trolls allowed Whiladan)
|
|
|
Honestly you people shouldn't hate on U.S. soldiers, no matter how much you disagree with the war. Its really disgusting.
I basically hail the Assange as a hero, and while I often condemn the actions of the U.S. government, would never do so of soldiers (who are not actively committing war crimes of course)
Realize that the actions of these soldiers are critical to sustaining your way of life. Its the inevitability of late capitalism. How do you think the average American citizen consumes roughly 3x as much resources as those in other developed nations, and 50x as much as those in 3rd world nations? Late capitalism is dependent on a strong military industrial complex in order to protect foreign "investments" of American capitalists. You and your politicians reap the economic benefits payed for in blood. The blood of Iraqis, and your own soldiers, most whom came from a lower socio-economic background.
Condemning these soldiers is literally the ultimate disgrace. Sure, the military industrial complex is an abomination in this country, but the foot soldiers are no less its victims then the iraqis who have died.
So yeah, U.S. politicians and generals are scum. But the flesh and blood who die defending your interests are not.
OH.. cool, thanks for the explanation. So whats up with the guys who get banned on tl.net forums and no one stands up for their freedom of speech? (no trolls allowed Whiladan)
TL is a private forum incurring no negative externalities outside of itself.
|
On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America.
He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA.
On December 08 2010 05:01 Half wrote:
Honestly you people shouldn't hate on U.S. soldiers, no matter how much you disagree with the war. Its really disgusting.
I'm not hating US soldiers (unless they're doing plain wrong stuff), I just kind of disagree with their leaders sometimes. This is one such time 
|
On December 08 2010 05:02 Bartuc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America. He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA.
That is so wrong it is astounding. Obviously, there needs to be extradition first (the US does not, after all, have the jurisdiction to kidnap him from other countries), but they can definitely prosecute him for stealing US documents if they believe that is the case.
That's basically like saying that you could murder someone consequence free in international waters.
|
On December 08 2010 05:00 Phantasy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 04:58 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 04:54 Phantasy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:50 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 04:48 Phantasy wrote:
So whats up with guys who get banned on tl.net forums and no one stands up for their freedom of speech? This is a web-forum, not the U.S.A. Point being, they are different animals and follow a different set of rules and expectations. Freedom of speech is not a right on a privately-owned web-forum.. My apologies. I thought there was continuity in ethics and expectations. I guess you can say that I don't care what you say since your online and posting documents online, but then say its okay if I'm standing next to you in Britain. You win, bro. No, I don't care what you say if you're on a forum or if you're standing right next to me. Freedom of speech is not the right to say what you want without criticism or that everyone must listen to you and take you seriously regardless of their own opinions. I'm not trying to personally attack you, just helping you understand the difference between the real world and a privately owned website. OH.. cool, thanks for the explanation. So whats up with the guys who get banned on tl.net forums and no one stands up for their freedom of speech? (no trolls allowed Whiladan)
I'm of the opinion that freedom of speech does not truly exist on the internet, because someone inevitably pays for the domain and can limit you from stating your opinion however they want; that is their right.
Luckily, TL.net has been pretty good about encouraging debate by allowing people to state their opinions. I can't personally think of any instances where someone was banned solely for having a different opinion, it's normally because they're being asshats.
|
On December 08 2010 05:05 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:02 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America. He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA. That is so wrong it is astounding. Obviously, there needs to be extradition first (the US does not, after all, have the jurisdiction to kidnap him from other countries), but they can definitely prosecute him for stealing US documents if they believe that is the case.
He hasn't stolen anything. He's (well not even HE, more like wikileaks) are publishuing documents supplied by thirds.
|
On December 08 2010 05:06 Bartuc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:05 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 05:02 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America. He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA. That is so wrong it is astounding. Obviously, there needs to be extradition first (the US does not, after all, have the jurisdiction to kidnap him from other countries), but they can definitely prosecute him for stealing US documents if they believe that is the case. He hasn't stolen anything. He's (well not even HE, more like wikileaks) are publishuing documents supplied by thirds.
Which they are encouraging people to send them. Which is conspiracy. If you tell someone to rob a bank, you can still be prosecuted. I'm not saying he is guilty of anything, I am saying that they can try to find out of he is guilty.
|
On December 08 2010 05:05 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:02 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America. He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA. That is so wrong it is astounding. Obviously, there needs to be extradition first (the US does not, after all, have the jurisdiction to kidnap him from other countries), but they can definitely prosecute him for stealing US documents if they believe that is the case.
He did not steal US documents. He published documents which he actually legally acquired. Private Manning (assuming the charges are correct) was not authorized to disclose these papers to Assange, and doing so was treason, but after disclosing them anyway, they became public, regardless of the legality of the disclosure.
That's basically like saying that you could murder someone consequence free in international waters.
Because there are specific and commonly agreed upon laws that govern conduct in international waters, as outlined by the UN.
Which they are encouraging people to send them. Which is conspiracy. If you tell someone to rob a bank, you can still be prosecuted. I'm not saying he is guilty of anything, I am saying that they can try to find out of he is guilty.
Except the nature of the site itself isn't illegal. They won the fucking amnest international award when they did the same to a government in Africa. But oh yeah, I guess its only bad when you do it to the U.S.
|
On December 08 2010 05:06 Bartuc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:05 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 05:02 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America. He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA. That is so wrong it is astounding. Obviously, there needs to be extradition first (the US does not, after all, have the jurisdiction to kidnap him from other countries), but they can definitely prosecute him for stealing US documents if they believe that is the case. He hasn't stolen anything. He's (well not even HE, more like wikileaks) are publishuing documents supplied by thirds.
Hes the figurehead. Off with their head. He chose it so he can reap it. He wants to martyr himself then so be it. I hope he gets to experience some of whats in those documents too.
|
|
|
On December 08 2010 04:24 Whiladan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 04:17 Uriel_SVK wrote:On December 08 2010 03:50 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:45 -Archangel- wrote:On December 08 2010 03:43 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:40 -Archangel- wrote:On December 08 2010 03:35 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:26 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 03:25 Whiladan wrote:
Irrelevant, unnecessary, and hilariously wrong.
That's your opinion. For me, Assange has done far more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_DunhamShould we next debate the definition of heroism? I know my next statement is going to make you mad but it needs to be said for people like you. Since USA had no business to even be in Iraq, every USA soldier that died there is not a hero but an idiot for letting his government send him there. You can only be a hero if you do something like that in a defensive war. I am sure none of the German soldiers in WWII are called heroes. the re Their's is not to reason why; their's is but to do and die. Until you have given the ultimate sacrifice to defend your friends or partners-in-arms or what have you, kindly go away and stop slandering those greater than yourself. Since you are still alive, I guess you have not done that as well  Seriously, under which rock have you come from? Kill 1000 people and you are a hero, kill 1 person and you are a murderer. Does that sound familiar? No, but I am not claiming that they are idiots either, am I? EDIT: BTW, I look forward to trading my blood for oil after Basic Training this spring. Brainwashed, ... dont get me wrong, but I am sorry for you. You think that going to a foreign country and kill people there means protecting your family and friends. It does not. It means just killing people who are defending their home, families and friends. You are not defending against enemy, you are attacking. + Show Spoiler +PS: Send photos of that weapons of mass destruction when you find them Don't get me wrong, but don't act like you understand the reason that I am joining the military. My family has been in the Army the Civil War. Not to mention free healthcare, free housing, free food, education, and a top secret clearance that sets you up for a successful career in the government? Nah, I probably just want to kill some Afghans. Side note, I've contributed to derailing this thread enough. Assange is not evil, nor is he a hero. Even though nothing has actually happened yet, I can't say I would be sympathetic if his acts came back to bite him in the ass.
The reasons why you do something is almost irrelevant in the face of the reality of the consequences of the choices you and many like you have made. There are over 1,000,000 dead Iraqi's for no good reason other than the US seeking resources.
Whatever paltry reason such as fake WMD or getting rid of a crazy dictator who is doing less damage than probably 5-10 other current crazy dictators pales in comparison with the loss of life and the loss of tons and tons of money to pay for defense contractors welfare.
Edit: Also since we have a volunteer army, the blood of all those people do lay at the individual's soldier's feet. If an organization is unjust and you join it anyway, well some of the responsibility for what happens after that lays at your feet. If you give up your own freedom to join the military for a little economic security and medical care and you end up killing people in a country you should have never have been in, then your own choices have made you culpable for what you are told to do. If you somehow didn't know about the military and didn't think the military would do something like that, then you are fool for giving away your life in service to that.
|
On December 08 2010 04:52 Shindrah wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:53 Whiladan wrote:
Australian man hands himself into British police over warrant for arrest put out in Sweden.
Fucking Americans. ^ This man speaks the truth, lets not argue with conspiracies, like the U.S. has some foothold over sweden and made them put out a warrant? No, just use the facts we know so far.
You honestly don't think US has anything to do with the manhunt going on after him and all that wikileaks has to endure? That US didn't pressure VISA/mastercard/paypal/amazon into closing with wikileaks?
If there's anyone sucking US titties it would be swedish government, for example the incident where US basically just came and picked up some poor bloke at swedish airport Arlanda, accused of terrorism and flew him away to be interogated.
|
On December 08 2010 05:08 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:05 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 05:02 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 04:23 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:21 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 04:19 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:14 Cpt.beefy wrote:On December 08 2010 04:07 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 04:04 Ceril wrote:
Assange is almost up there with the founding fathers for standing for what he belive will make a better world. Remember that thoose guys today would be classified terrorists/political dissidents by the US gov for their ideas clad for a modern day if they were to reincarnate in the US. You must know what you are taking about, since you live in America and all. Or can I start telling you how the Swedish people feel? His option is as valid as ANY DEMOCRATIC member of society. I love how your argument is as arrogant as WE invented free-speech because Im an american.... jesus man listen to yourself. This guy is under-arrest for using his FREE-SPEECH and you still don't wanna hear other people's opinion on it cos there not from the land of the free?! LOL! Can you please point to where I said that we invented free speech? Could you also point to where I said that other people's opinions don't matter? I believe what I said is not to tell us how we think, not don't tell us what you think of us. The guy is under arrest for rape, or surprise sex, or whatever. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, all you are doing is conjecturing. Why is the US seeking extradition in a Swedish Surprise Sex case. If that is the case, then I am guessing that they feel he has broken a US law in addition to whatever Swedish charges there are. Freedom of speech has limits-- everyone knows that. It might not be for me to say what those limits are, but they do exist. Just like how you cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. These are not laws unique to America. He wasn't in the USA, thus what he was doing falls out of the jurisdiction of the USA. That is so wrong it is astounding. Obviously, there needs to be extradition first (the US does not, after all, have the jurisdiction to kidnap him from other countries), but they can definitely prosecute him for stealing US documents if they believe that is the case. He did not steal US documents. He published documents which he actually legally acquired. Private Manning (assuming the charges are correct) was not authorized to disclose these papers to Assange, and doing so was treason, but after disclosing them anyway, they became public, regardless of the legality of the disclosure. Show nested quote +
That's basically like saying that you could murder someone consequence free in international waters.
Because there are specific and commonly agreed upon laws that govern conduct in international waters, as outlined by the UN. Show nested quote +
Which they are encouraging people to send them. Which is conspiracy. If you tell someone to rob a bank, you can still be prosecuted. I'm not saying he is guilty of anything, I am saying that they can try to find out of he is guilty.
Except the nature of the site itself isn't illegal. They won the fucking amnest international award when they did the same to a government in Africa. But oh yeah, I guess its only bad when you do it to the U.S.
Again, I don't think I ever said that what he did was illegal. What I said is that I can see why someone would want to find out if it was illegal or not, or if he is guilty or not, which is why courts exist. That is the entire point of having a trial.
And if you are stooping to compare some random government in Africa to the United States, I'd say you are out of fuel in this conversation.
|
Hes the figurehead. Off with their head. He chose it so he can reap it. He wants to martyr himself then so be it. I hope he gets to experience some of whats in those documents too.
Its amazing how blatantly fascist some people are. Look, I know theirs a global recession, there was one when Hitler took power too, lets not let some scarcity that overtake our sense of humanity ok?
And if you are stooping to compare some random government in Africa to the United States, I'd say you are out of fuel in this conversation.
Where exactly is that comparison invalid, in the specific context I used? If your resorting to pundits, I'd suggest you stop posting.
|
On December 08 2010 05:12 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
Hes the figurehead. Off with their head. He chose it so he can reap it. He wants to martyr himself then so be it. I hope he gets to experience some of whats in those documents too.
Its amazing how blatantly fascist some people are. Look, I know theirs a global recession, there was one when Hitler took power too, lets not let some scarcity that overtake our sense of humanity ok? Show nested quote +
And if you are stooping to compare some random government in Africa to the United States, I'd say you are out of fuel in this conversation.
Where exactly is that comparison invalid, in the specific context I used? If your resorting to pundits, I'd suggest you stop posting.
Because exposing a human rights violation in Africa (which I would argue is hardly revolutionary, anyway) is not comparable to the sort of documents being released now. Also, why is everyone acting as if the United States is the only country that would have been pissed over this incident? Last time I checked, other countries were involved in the whole mess.
EDIT: Also, talking about people being blatantly fascist-- what exactly is inherently wrong with fascism? I mean, fascism removed from its historical regimes/racist connotations (in the same way that talking about communism requires removing Soviet ideology from the conversation)?
|
On December 08 2010 05:10 RivetHead wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 04:24 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 04:17 Uriel_SVK wrote:On December 08 2010 03:50 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:45 -Archangel- wrote:On December 08 2010 03:43 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:40 -Archangel- wrote:On December 08 2010 03:35 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:26 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 03:25 Whiladan wrote:
Irrelevant, unnecessary, and hilariously wrong.
That's your opinion. For me, Assange has done far more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_DunhamShould we next debate the definition of heroism? I know my next statement is going to make you mad but it needs to be said for people like you. Since USA had no business to even be in Iraq, every USA soldier that died there is not a hero but an idiot for letting his government send him there. You can only be a hero if you do something like that in a defensive war. I am sure none of the German soldiers in WWII are called heroes. the re Their's is not to reason why; their's is but to do and die. Until you have given the ultimate sacrifice to defend your friends or partners-in-arms or what have you, kindly go away and stop slandering those greater than yourself. Since you are still alive, I guess you have not done that as well Seriously, under which rock have you come from? Kill 1000 people and you are a hero, kill 1 person and you are a murderer. Does that sound familiar? No, but I am not claiming that they are idiots either, am I? EDIT: BTW, I look forward to trading my blood for oil after Basic Training this spring. Brainwashed, ... dont get me wrong, but I am sorry for you. You think that going to a foreign country and kill people there means protecting your family and friends. It does not. It means just killing people who are defending their home, families and friends. You are not defending against enemy, you are attacking. + Show Spoiler +PS: Send photos of that weapons of mass destruction when you find them Don't get me wrong, but don't act like you understand the reason that I am joining the military. My family has been in the Army the Civil War. Not to mention free healthcare, free housing, free food, education, and a top secret clearance that sets you up for a successful career in the government? Nah, I probably just want to kill some Afghans. Side note, I've contributed to derailing this thread enough. Assange is not evil, nor is he a hero. Even though nothing has actually happened yet, I can't say I would be sympathetic if his acts came back to bite him in the ass. The reasons why you do something is almost irrelevant in the face of the reality of the consequences of the choices you and many like you have made. There are over 1,000,000 dead Iraqi's for no good reason other than the US seeking resources. Whatever paltry reason such as fake WMD or getting rid of a crazy dictator who is doing less damage than probably 5-10 other current crazy dictators pales in comparison with the loss of life and the loss of tons and tons of money to pay for defense contractors welfare.
Surpring how often I have linked this on TL.net
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Really speaks to my tendencies to incite argument.
However, you are right in some respects; blood for oil is wrong. But neither I nor any of the other soldiers involved (we're talking everything below Brigadier) had anything to do with the decision to move into Iraq. Put that on Bush, not on me.
|
This is ridiculous. A case against him magically appears when he releases secret document? I call sincere bullshit on that one. The only reason for this is to have him in custody and in the hands of the government. This is like some V for Vendetta shit.
|
On December 08 2010 05:23 Hyperbola wrote:
This is ridiculous. A case against him magically appears when he releases secret document? I call sincere bullshit on that one. The only reason for this is to have him in custody and in the hands of the government. This is like some V for Vendetta shit.
As many people have pointed out already, this charge is months old and he is just now being arrested for it. Maybe it is shady, maybe it isn't, but it isn't like these women came out today and made the allegation.
|
On December 08 2010 05:15 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:12 Half wrote:
Hes the figurehead. Off with their head. He chose it so he can reap it. He wants to martyr himself then so be it. I hope he gets to experience some of whats in those documents too.
Its amazing how blatantly fascist some people are. Look, I know theirs a global recession, there was one when Hitler took power too, lets not let some scarcity that overtake our sense of humanity ok?
And if you are stooping to compare some random government in Africa to the United States, I'd say you are out of fuel in this conversation.
Where exactly is that comparison invalid, in the specific context I used? If your resorting to pundits, I'd suggest you stop posting. Because exposing a human rights violation in Africa (which I would argue is hardly revolutionary, anyway) is not comparable to the sort of documents being released now. Also, why is everyone acting as if the United States is the only country that would have been pissed over this incident? Last time I checked, other countries were involved in the whole mess.
Why is it not? The common threads are clear a)Exposes evidence of moral wrongdoing at the cost of b)Power of the establishment on a domestic and global seen, with no reported loss of life.
In fact, if you agree with surpressing wikileaks, you must also agree with imprisoning and suppressing Liu Xiabao because his release would hurt the domestic and international of China.
EDIT: Also, talking about people being blatantly fascist-- what exactly is inherently wrong with fascism? I mean, fascism removed from its historical regimes/racist connotations (in the same way that talking about communism requires removing Soviet ideology from the conversation)?
Because the ideology of facism is based around using ideologues, mass movements and war to prop up a failing industrial sector that is no longer economically efficient.
No matter how you look at it, its wrong. Even if we ignore human morals, its economically inefficient and slows economic growth in the long term, should the movement succeed unsuppressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
