• Julian Assange arrested
    506 replies, posted
[QUOTE='[sluggo];26554622']According to poles most of the Muslims in the middle east support Al Queada. Many would also like to see segregation between men and women and think that Muslims should be killed if they convert to another religion.[/QUOTE] This has to do with terrorism how? ok there backwards, so backwards they don't have the means of doing any real damage in the USA without help, a lot of help.
[QUOTE='[sluggo];26554622']According to poles most of the Muslims in the middle east support Al Queada. Many would also like to see segregation between men and women and think that Muslims should be killed if they convert to another religion.[/QUOTE] citation needed
[QUOTE=Jiyoon;26554653][img_thumb]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_2AYANb0P9Fs/TPZoIWezyCI/AAAAAAAACCo/wVCuZ7ylxGk/s1600/moral%2Brelativism.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] I do not get it. the left one is stupid and the right one is reading biased newspaper.
[QUOTE=Jiyoon;26554653]pic[/QUOTE] That's a really naive way of looking at it, especially since it was media outlets that published many of the documents.
[QUOTE=Athena;26554687]citation needed[/QUOTE] Apostasy
[QUOTE=Athena;26554649]I'm not answering with a yes or no because it's obviously loaded. I've made my stance clear.[/QUOTE] It's only "loaded" because your position is self-contradictory. You imply you don't have a problem with classified documents that don't cover up criminal behavior, yet you support a guy whose intent is to release any classified documents he can, regardless of whether they contain anything criminal. If your position was defensible, you would be able to commit to it.
hey guys want to see my impression of half of the people in this thread? Y0 guis im so anti astablishment fuk da government row row fight da powa [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Bad post" - TH89))[/highlight]
[QUOTE='[sluggo];26554622']According to poles most of the Muslims in the middle east support Al Queada. Many would also like to see segregation between men and women and think that Muslims should be killed if they convert to another religion.[/QUOTE] What do poles know? They don't even live on the same continent.
[QUOTE=Athena;26554649]I'm not answering with a yes or no because it's obviously loaded. I've made my stance clear.[/QUOTE] Wait, no you haven't. You've been dancing around this quite clear question for some time.
[QUOTE=TH89;26554785]What do poles know? They don't even live on the same continent.[/QUOTE] I was so tempted to say something, but I thought it would be a bit rude to take the piss out of a simple spelling mistake.
[QUOTE=Jsm;26554867]I was so tempted to say something, but I thought it would be a bit rude to take the piss out of a simple spelling mistake.[/QUOTE] Good thing I have no standards whatsoever.
I wish people would shut the fuck up about 'Al Quada" and realize that wikileaks has little to do with it. (Al Quada is just a made up term to apply to all muslim extremist groups-- even though they're all detached and fight for different political reasons.) Enough of this terrorism shit.
[QUOTE=Jsm;26542736]At least if he does go to jail it will be in Sweden, I hear the prisons there are pretty good.[/QUOTE] He will truly be reformed. Maybe they can reeducate him and give him a job after he is released.
[QUOTE=TH89;26554762]It's only "loaded" because your position is self-contradictory. You imply you don't have a problem with classified documents that don't cover up criminal behavior, yet you support a guy whose intent is to release any classified documents he can, regardless of whether they contain anything criminal.[/quote] I support document classification if and only if it is genuinely important to national security. Ideally what Secret and Top Secret should be. In that case, we wouldn't need wikileaks, and anyone exposing those could be arguably hurting the country. [i]So in an ideal system, I support classification.[/i] But since things are very far from ideal, and classification is being abused to cover up things, then I support the exposition of those documents to inform the public, because in an ideally that's what would happen (or not even happen in the first place). My idea is not contradictory, and it's also not a dichotomy. ...And this is what Assange is doing. He's disseminating information that, for the most part, the public should be allowed to know about. Yes, there are documents that don't really have much value (okay, so america really does think canada is america's hat, or that guy from that country's kind of a prick), but on the damage continuum it's a 0. So yes, while technically classified, it's no big deal to release. If Assange leaked the launch codes, I would have a problem.
[QUOTE=Athena;26556412]I support document classification if and only if it is genuinely important to national security. Ideally what Secret and Top Secret should be. In that case, we wouldn't need wikileaks, and anyone exposing those could be arguably hurting the country. [i]So in an ideal system, I support classification.[/i] But since things are very far from ideal, and classification is being abused to cover up things, then I support their exposition to inform the public, because in an ideal system, that's what would happen (or not even happen in the first place). My idea is not contradictory, and it's also not a dichotomy. ...And this is what Assange is doing. He's disseminating information that, for the most part, the public should be allowed to know about. Yes, there are documents that don't really have much value (okay, so america really does think canada is america's hat, or that guy from that country's kind of a prick), but on the damage continuum it's a 0. So yes, while technically classified, it's no big deal to release. If Assange leaked the launch codes, I would have a problem.[/QUOTE] So the solution to an unideal system is to let one site release all the secrets that "the public should be allowed to know about?" Who's going to define what the public should and shouldn't know? If this continues, Assange will be doing that. Honestly, this still isn't making sense to me. The solution to an unideal system is to strive to make it ideal, not to come up with volatile fixes.
[QUOTE=postmanX3;26556534]So the solution to an unideal system is to let one site release all the secrets that "the public should be allowed to know about?" Who's going to define what the public should and shouldn't know? If this continues, Assange will be doing that. Honestly, this still isn't making sense to me. The solution to an unideal system is to strive to make it ideal, not to come up with volatile fixes.[/QUOTE] Who else would you suggest? He's the one that's receiving the documents. So, he gets to make the choice. He's got a pretty good brain inside his head and just wants the US to be held accountable for its actions. He's not the dangerous radical some demonize him to be. Sometimes there are only two options and neither is a clear winner.
[QUOTE=Athena;26556412]...And this is what Assange is doing. He's disseminating information that, for the most part, the public should be allowed to know about. Yes, there are documents that don't really have much value (okay, so america really does think canada is america's hat, or that guy from that country's kind of a prick), but on the damage continuum it's a 0. So yes, while technically classified, it's no big deal to release.[/QUOTE] Okay look, this is why security classifications are important. If Hillary Clinton wants to talk to her aide in Tel Aviv about something sensitive, like being worried the Israeli prime minister may have Alzheimers, she should be able to do so without having to worry about it being published verbatim the very next day, for her political opponents to scour for things to crucify her for. Instead, it is given a low-level security classification, so that a number of people within the government can see it and be sure it doesn't say "let's steal money from the treasury and wiretap people," but it is not released publicly. Years later, when the contents are no longer sensitive, it will be declassified. This is how it works. If you say "everything other than matters of national security should be made public immediately" then our people will simply find other ways to communicate, and then we won't have a record of [i]anything[/i]. Declassifying everything wouldn't increase government transparency, it would eliminate it completely. As inefficient as it can sometimes seem, the government is actually a very well-developed system. Assuming that classification of low-level documents is just done to screw you over is silly. [editline]8th December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=MovingSalad;26556285]I wish people would shut the fuck up about 'Al Quada" and realize that wikileaks has little to do with it. (Al Quada is just a made up term to apply to all muslim extremist groups-- even though they're all detached and fight for different political reasons.) Enough of this terrorism shit.[/QUOTE] Looks like Wikileaks is doing a great job of informing the American public about the issues!
[QUOTE=TH89;26557006]Okay look, this is why security classifications are important. If Hillary Clinton wants to talk to her aide in Tel Aviv about something sensitive, like being worried the Israeli prime minister may have Alzheimers, she should be able to do so without having to worry about it being published verbatim the very next day, for her political opponents to scour for things to crucify her for. Instead, it is given a low-level security classification, so that a number of people within the government can see it and be sure it doesn't say "let's steal money from the treasury and wiretap people," but it is not released publicly. Years later, when the contents are no longer sensitive, it will be declassified. This is how it works. If you say "everything other than matters of national security should be made public immediately" then our people will simply find other ways to communicate, and then we won't have a record of [i]anything[/i]. Declassifying everything wouldn't increase government transparency, it would eliminate it completely. As inefficient as it can sometimes seem, the government is actually a very well-developed system. Assuming that classification of low-level documents is just done to screw you over is silly. [editline]8th December 2010[/editline] Looks like Wikileaks is doing a great job of informing the American public about the issues![/QUOTE] No obviously the government is out to get us viva la revolucion!
[QUOTE=Kinglah Crab;26550559]yes lets nuke a single person what a great idea[/QUOTE] it's the only way to be sure
[QUOTE='[sluggo];26554500']For the sake of national security and law, we need to shut this guy down and kill him.[/QUOTE] For the sake of my sanity, I need to add you to my ignore list.
There had been nothing but WL drama lately
[Quote]Cable 301 of 250,000 (0.12% of data has been release) [/quote] Do want encryption key.
the two women he fucked were the governments
[QUOTE=MasterG;26560495]only 0.12%? Oh boy, this is going to go on for years. If wikileaks isn't taken down.[/QUOTE] Taking down over a thousand mirror sites will take a bit.
[QUOTE=faze;26554346]At what cost, jeopardizing the safety of the public? Fuck no. I'd rather not have to worry about getting blown up by a Muslim with a bomb strapped to his chest, or getting blown up by an IED while driving down 95.[/QUOTE] you have about as much chance of dying from a terrorist attack as you do getting laid. that is to say, essentially nonexistent. [editline]8th December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=postmanX3;26554438]Not really, it just so happens that some of our most dangerous enemies at the moment happen to be Muslim.[/QUOTE] no, his post was racist by assuming it was a muslim that was going kill him. if i said "i don't want my bike stolen by some nigger" i would be banned quite quickly.
thread music should be added to OP [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDB7pvkaC_I[/media]
[QUOTE=XIII_GT;26561054]thread music should be added to OP [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDB7pvkaC_I[/media][/QUOTE] More like [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZU6XyFxCA0[/media]
If he didn't even have the affair with those two people, they would have absolutely nothing on him. They probably won't have enough evidence anyway.
[QUOTE=W00tbeer1;26570271]If he didn't even have the affair with those two people, they would have absolutely nothing on him. They probably won't have enough evidence anyway.[/QUOTE] They would have made up something, which is pretty much what they did.
Dunno if I'm late, but anything about that doomsday file?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.