# Wikileaks domain shut down



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

> Stockholm:  WikiLeaks' domain name system provider says it has withdrawn service to the wikileaks.org name.
> 
> EveryDNS says it dropped the website late on Thursday after it became the "target of multiple distributed denial of service attacks."
> 
> ...



fuck freedom of speech


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

About time.


----------



## PerveeSage (Dec 3, 2010)

And so, communist America begins.


----------



## xenopyre (Dec 3, 2010)

America can you sink any lower ??? i'm going to donate .


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> And so, communist America begins.



We are FAR from being communist in any way. Don't throw around terms if you don't know what they mean.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

What do you expect you put a Muslim in the White House who is doing everything possible along with his puppets in Congress to destroy this country... Hello Hello dead anyone else escape The Matrix or are you still asleep at the wheel. If you want real change if you want this country back if you want a future Barak Obama & his VP must not be re-elected...

Nuff Said'


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> We are FAR from being communist in any way. Don't throw around terms if you don't know what they mean.



Yeah!! .. Americans can never stoop as low as chinese and block flow of information.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

That's kind of what happens when you run an espionage network, you get fucked like one. Its nice to see all the crying in this thread though, tears make the best lube


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> That's kind of what happens when you run an espionage network



If espionage gets you fucked then the USA should have an anus the size of texas


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> If espionage gets you fucked then the USA should have an anus the size of texas


That's a pretty silly sentiment considering that you typically don't publicize secrets you steal, that was kind of the problem with wikileaks and they only seemed to try and tarnish the reputations of people they deemed worthy and they didn't mind lying or putting civilians in harm's way to do so. 

But see if I give a darn, everyone runs espionage network, but how many run them with the intent to publish the stuff they find for everyone and without the proper protections. Its not as if people don't try to fuck other countries over, but that's the difference, they're *countries. *


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> Yeah!! .. Americans can never stoop as low as chinese and block flow of information.



That has nothing to do with communism. So again, don't use terms if you don't know what they mean.

Anyways, the rights guaranteed to our citizens and the rights the free world in general pretty much does, are not in absolutes. Don't go on with BS about blocking the flow of information. Just like freedom of speech doesn't mean you can say absolutely anything you want, freedom of press does not mean one can release any sort of information they want. There is such a thing as responsible journalism, something Wikileaks had in short supply. People's lives were put at risk, although I don't think any have been killed so far. Diplomacy and international relations were put at risk as well. It's good that his site was put down, and hopefully in time Assange will be too.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> That has nothing to do with communism. So again, don't use terms if you don't know what they mean.
> 
> Anyways, the rights guaranteed to our citizens and the rights the free world in general pretty much does, are not in absolutes. Don't go on with BS about blocking the flow of information. Just like freedom of speech doesn't mean you can say absolutely anything you want, freedom of press does not mean one can release any sort of information they want. People's lives were put at risk, although I don't think any have been killed so far. It's good that his site was put down, and hopefully in time Assange will be too.



But they kind of did vote for the blocking of certain types of information, or the first step of it. The COICA passed a few weeks ago (the thing I kept telling everyone to go stop, oddly enough) and looking at what it prohibits it could be used to stop exactly this...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> But they kind of did vote for the blocking of certain types of information, or the first step of it. The COICA passed a few weeks ago (the thing I kept telling everyone to go stop, oddly enough) and looking at what it prohibits it could be used to stop exactly this...



I know about that, I'm actually pretty worried about that...I have my optimistic doubts that it won't go through (at least not in its entirety), but a lot the content Wikileaks is of a very different level that's always been beyond the limits of free press. Like putting out sensitive or even classified information of individuals without consent for example.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> That's a pretty silly sentiment considering that you typically don't publicize secrets you steal



You also don't typically imprison innocent people outside any regulations of law and keep them in some shady place for years

You also don't typically start wars with enemies that have no way of being a threat to you and throw out billions of dollars and many lives of soldiers, of which the surviving veterans are often traumatized

You also don't typically order diplomats to commit espionage, going against international law


So yeah I don't really think the USA has any right to complain about someone telling on them.


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> That has nothing to do with communism. So again, don't use terms if you don't know what they mean.
> 
> Anyways, the rights guaranteed to our citizens and the rights the free world in general pretty much does, are not in absolutes. Don't go on with BS about blocking the flow of information. Just like freedom of speech doesn't mean you can say absolutely anything you want, freedom of press does not mean one can release any sort of information they want. There is such a thing as responsible journalism, something Wikileaks had in short supply. People's lives were put at risk, although I don't think any have been killed so far. Diplomacy and international relations were put at risk as well. It's good that his site was put down, and hopefully in time Assange will be too.



Well the reason why I compared this to china was because IT was criticised a lot for blocking news during the whole tibet freedom riots , To maintain peace and to prevent further riots -- Well it was considered bad but US did use it to its leverage (just like it used the tianamenn massacre).

When Wikileaks screwed the other countries governments exposing their frauds IT was given awards.... But when it does the exact same thing to US ... ie to expose its secrets it becomes evil??


----------



## Nyasi (Dec 3, 2010)

Just donated to Wikileaks... I don't fucking care. I support them 100% ...


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> You also don't typically imprison innocent people outside any regulations of law and keep them in some shady place for years
> 
> You also don't typically start wars with enemies that have no way of being a threat to you and throw out billions of dollars and many lives of soldiers, of which the surviving veterans are often traumatized
> 
> ...



You seem to be in the business of making sweeping, stupid generalizations. 

Way to make yourself look like a non-factor. 



Nyasi said:


> Just donated to Wikileaks... I don't fucking care. I support them 100% ...



And how will your money get there? Through banks in the internet, you better hope it doesn't get channeled right back to the US


----------



## id_1948 (Dec 3, 2010)

Ive just been onto the website and read a few of the cable release

Its still up and running- and theyre getting more interesting by the day... and thats only with 500 out of 250,000 letters released

I say keep it coming.... everyone crying about the releases and how they dont add anything new and its a crime and blah blah blah... well keep crying. It good to see how leaders really think and act and lie to their own people...


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

id_1948 said:


> Ive just been onto the website and read a few of the cable release
> 
> Its still up and running- and theyre getting more interesting by the day... and thats only with 500 out of 250,000 letters released
> 
> I say keep it coming.... everyone crying about the releases and how they dont add anything new and its a crime and blah blah blah... well keep crying. It good to see how leaders really think and act and lie to their own people...



It's good to see you pay so little attention that you're surprised by people being killed in wars or espionage or the governments (most of them) having policies of denying things having to do with espionage. 

It's not crying, wikileaks put lives in danger and did so when the media and the US government told them to take steps not to. You can throw your anti US temper tantrum all you want but your support of a group like this just makes you look petty and makes sure anyone who's reasonable won't want to listen.

Not to mention Putin going on TV and saying the stuff released was nothing, the only people excited by this are those too naive to understand that its been known for a while.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You seem to be in the business of making sweeping, stupid generalizations.
> 
> Way to make yourself look like a non-factor.


 
Why is it that every time you post my face goes ?

Except none of those are sweeping generalizations and all facts that even people in the U.S knew from the start.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Final Giku Tenshou said:


> Why is it that every time you post my face goes ?
> 
> Except none of those are sweeping generalizations and all facts that even people in the U.S knew from the start.



No they were sweeping generalizations and that's why I called them as such. Don't like what I post, don't fucking read it. Simple as that. I don't know who you are, that's how little I care.


----------



## Nyasi (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> And how will your money get there? Through banks in the internet, you better hope it doesn't get channeled right back to the US



Yes, thats why Wikileaks is calling + thanking for donations... because all the money lands in the hands of the US. Or maybe Israel will get it? What about North Korea?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Nyasi said:


> Yes, thats why Wikileaks is calling + thanking for donations... because all the money lands in the hands of the US. Or maybe Israel will get it? What about North Korea?



I'm just saying that if money is passing hands electronically, one of the things that pretty much any government with clout can do is freeze bank accounts. Granted you can put them in places where its hard, but you can facepalm all you want, won't change the fact.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> No they were sweeping generalizations and that's why I called them as such. Don't like what I post, don't fucking read it. Simple as that. I don't know who you are, that's how little I care.


 
Insulting me now? Must be unable to come up with any good counter arguments. No wonder my IQ drops a little every time I read a post by you.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You seem to be in the business of making sweeping, stupid generalizations.



Generalizations? I didn't say every single american citizen is at fault for the things I mentioned, and you can't deny what I said is true. I dare you to try.

But the americans voted the responsible people into power, repeatedly(!).


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Negging me for "whining at you?" That's hilarious, I'm done with this argument, this isn't even worth my time. No, correction, _you _aren't even worth my time.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Final Giku Tenshou said:


> Insulting me now? Must be unable to come up with any good counter arguments. No wonder my IQ drops a little every time I read a post by you.


It's not an insult, where's the insult. I just said I don't care and if you don't like it, don't read it...

You can claim insult if you want, but there's not one there. The counter argument is there wasn't an argument to start with. Wikileaks posting of facts anyone with a scrap of sense already knew isn't helping anything and their want to be anarchist attitude is pretty archaic and stupid. 

You don't question their methods, you don't question the information they have and don't put out or who gets to sift through before it gets put out. You're as much a sheep as the people you act as if you're battling against and you've just fallen inline behind an unknown entity and put your trust in someone whom you've know idea where their true allegiance lies. 

I'd put my trust in the government before I did in some group so irresponsible that they knowingly put civilians in danger to name names of Afghan informants. 

And if it was your fucking family who was trying to help their country get free of the Taliban and you had your head laid on the chopping block, maybe you would understand that what wikileaks is doing is putting more civilians and soldiers at risk. 

Who will want to tell soldiers important information when their name could end up in the hands of insurgents? Who will want to be a soldier or CIA agent if they could be sold out by an entity like wikileaks. 

Unlike you, I have thought this out and I don't type it out, not because I don't have an argument, but for the sake of my fucking sanity as I've had to repeat myself to people so many times when they can't understand the basics of "this is not new news". 

Long Story Short: If you didn't realize most of this, you probably shouldn't be told now.



Final Giku Tenshou said:


> Negging me for "whining at you?"  That's hilarious, I'm done with this argument, this isn't even worth my  time. No, correction, _you _aren't even worth my time.



No skin off my back, you've got the reply right there. But coming back here to whine about negs just makes you look butt hurt.



Zaru said:


> Generalizations? I didn't say every single american  citizen is at fault for the things I mentioned, and you can't deny what  I said is true. I dare you to try.
> 
> But the americans voted the responsible people into power, repeatedly(!).



Repeatedly? I think you need to look in the president book. Bush was elected twice, and he couldn't have caused all of this just by being Governor of a state. 

But hindsight is 20/20, its nice to know you can tell people what they should do years after the fact with no clue what would have happened otherwise.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

Its amazing how the U.S. after months after Wikipedia has been posting Classified Documents that they pulled the plug and yet after 10 years they still can't seem to find that friend in the Middle East convenient wouldn't you say.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> Its amazing how the U.S. after months after Wikipedia has been posting Classified Documents that they pulled the plug and yet after 10 years they still can't seem to find that friend in the Middle East convenient wouldn't you say.


What's the comparison now? This doesn't even make sense, shutting a website down (wikileaks, not pedia) is a lot easier than finding a person who doesn't want to be found and is used to being off the radar.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Cause they don't care about him anymore. The guy at wikileaks was going after banks and such now. And they bought our government so now our government is a whore to the banks and businesses. It's fucking disgusting, man. When the government files were leaked, they weren't happy, but didn't really do anything. Now that he's going after a business or bank, they are calling him a rapist, getting the domain shut down, etc. We really need to do something about this bullshit.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You don't question their methods, you don't question the information they have and don't put out or who gets to sift through before it gets put out. You're as much a sheep as the people you act as if you're battling against and you've just fallen inline behind an unknown entity and put your trust in someone whom you've know idea where their true allegiance lies.


 
The words of a naive person who doesn't understand a clue about how the real world works. This government you're defending? They have their own methods they use that are completely questionable, and they do a lot of things behind your back that you don't know about. I'd keep an eye out if I were you, otherwise you might lose that "freedom" that you currently possess one day.



> I'd put my trust in the government before I did in some group so irresponsible that they knowingly put civilians in danger to name names of Afghan informants.


 
How cute, you actually believe that bullshit about anything they're placing out being dangerous to civilians, I see you're blindly following whatever the government tells you, just like a sheep. The game is rigged folks, the government are the shepherds and you are their sheep.



> And if it was your fucking family who was trying to help their country get free of the Taliban and you had your head laid on the chopping block, maybe you would understand that what wikileaks is doing is putting more civilians and soldiers at risk.


 
Except nothing of what wikileaks has currently posted has given any sort of names or faces to people whatsoever. How the fuck can you endanger people who you don't even fucking know? I also love how you bring family into this, when that has nothing to do with what Wikileaks is doing.



> Who will want to tell soldiers important information when their name could end up in the hands of insurgents? Who will want to be a soldier or CIA agent if they could be sold out by an entity like wikileaks.


 
Naively following whatever the fuck Government tells you because you can't see the bigger picture. Go back to where you come from child, leave this kind of discussion up to the people who understand it.



> Unlike you, I have thought this out and I don't type it out, not because I don't have an argument, but for the sake of my fucking sanity as I've had to repeat myself to people so many times when they can't understand the basics of "this is not new news".


 
You lost at the "not new news" part, oh wait no you didn't, because I already knew none of what Wikileaks posted was new news, it's why I'm happy to see other people finally being shown the light.



> Long Story Short: If you didn't realize most of this, you probably shouldn't be told now.


 
Why is that? Because it's wrong to question what the Government might be doing behind your backs without you ever knowing?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Cause they don't care about him anymore. The guy at wikileaks was going after banks and such now. And they bought our government so now our government is a whore to the banks and businesses. It's fucking disgusting, man. When the government files were leaked, they weren't happy, but didn't really do anything. Now that he's going after a business or bank, they are calling him a rapist, getting the domain shut down, etc. We really need to do something about this bullshit.


He was called a rapist months ago...I doubt it was the banks as people are writing countless books on how evil the banks are all of the time and they're going on TV promoting them. 

Leave it to you to turn this into a Conspiracy thing. 

They were pissed someone was stealing classified information, no one cares about protecting the fucking banks, you can't hurt them because they have all the money.



Final Giku Tenshou said:


> The words of a naive person who  doesn't understand a clue about how the real world works. This  government you're defending? They have their own methods they use that  are completely questionable, and they do a lot of things behind your  back that you don't know about. I'd keep an eye out if I were you,  otherwise you might lose that "freedom" that you currently possess one  day.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The New York Times backed off because of the civilian names too, but I like how all your arguments are practically  the same bullshit point, the same one I refuted with the post you're responding to. What happened to having nothing to say to me? Repeating arguments I've already shot down won't make me come back and argue with you. 

And once again, these were known, public facts. Not hidden, they were KNOWN...that's why I called them not new. They were revealing most of them to people that just for some reason seemed to be unable to figure out how to find them. Not my fault people are slow.


----------



## Bart (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> Its amazing how the U.S. after months after Wikipedia has been posting Classified Documents that they pulled the plug and yet after 10 years they still can't seem to find that friend in the Middle East convenient wouldn't you say.



Do not try to bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead only try to realise the truth... there is no spoon.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Bart said:


> Do not try to bend the spoon, that's impossible. Instead only try to realise the truth... there is no spoon.


There's no bin Laden now? Yeah, because no one heard about that guy before 9/11


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Repeatedly? I think you need to look in the president book. Bush was elected twice, and he couldn't have caused all of this just by being Governor of a state.



The wars on iraq and afghanistan, guantanamo, and the 2005/2006 calls for espionage were all done under the legislation periods of Bush. He was re-elected, and as far as I know, doing something again is called "repeating" something. As in, repeatedly doing something. 

So yeah what were you trying to say again?


----------



## Vergil (Dec 3, 2010)

Whats stopping wikileaks simply giving their info to major newspapers? They'll print it won't they?

I don't know why they need to have all the raw data online, there aren't too many folk in the world that will sift through all of it anywat


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> The wars on iraq and afghanistan, guantanamo, and the 2005/2006 calls for espionage were all done under the legislation periods of Bush. He was re-elected, and as far as I know, doing something again is called "repeating" something. As in, repeatedly doing something.
> 
> So yeah what were you trying to say again?


The war in Afghanistan...this is why I keep saying you need to get your facts straight. That was a legit war and it was the war we should have been fighting all along. But thanks for pulling that. 

And repeatedly denotes a series, at least more than two, since you can only be President twice, its just a silly thing to say. We had a two term Democrat, with a two term Republican and then another Democrat. 

Incumbency is hard to over come, the other party had a weak candidate who wasn't much more than a liar in his own campaign, but hey, none of that's a factor when you can generalize!


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Vergil said:


> Whats stopping wikileaks simply giving their info to major newspapers? They'll print it won't they?



The thing IS that wikileaks has a gazillion documents

Who's gonna read through all that? The revelations are usually made by working together with major newspapers/magazines which do investigative journalism based on the data.


----------



## Kind of a big deal (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> And so, communist America begins.



Kinda true haha. Not exactly communism though but rather some kind of theocracy. Either way it's totalitarian, and dismissing it just because it's not 'technically' communism seems like you would be completely missing the point, even though you know full well what he meant.

Transparency of government dealings is absolutely imperative for a democracy. You can only elect people if you know what they have done, not just what they tell you they have done. The people need some kind of method of method to check this information, like the free press. If you take it away, you don't work with the best interest of the people in mind.

Any democratic government that does something like that, would be a democracy in name only. Like the democratic people's republic of north korea as an extreme example.

Maybe it's idealistic to think it should work like that, but if you don't even have that anymore, it means you've given up and you're basically no more than underlings rather than citizens. I thought Americans had more fire in their bellies.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Kind of a big deal said:


> Kinda true haha. Not exactly communism though but rather some kind of theocracy. Either way it's totalitarian, and dismissing it just because it's not 'technically' communism seems like you would be completely missing the point, even though you know full well what he meant.
> 
> Transparency of government dealings is absolutely imperative for a democracy. You can only elect people if you know what they have done, not just what they tell you they have done. The people need some kind of method of method to check this information, like the free press. If you take it away, you don't work with the best interest of the people in mind.
> 
> ...


Total transparency of government renders government unable to protect its people and its country. 

I don't see how you can ever argue for total transparency and that's just what you're doing here. 

I don't need to know what's done in espionage because if I know, its not working because anyone can know. I don't need to know about troop movements or other mundane stuff that has no bearing on my life, we elect government officials based on the job they do handling this stuff. 

The system can't always work, but no system involving people ever could.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> That was a legit war



What the flying fuck 

Don't even get me started on how useful it is to fight some islamist hillbillies in their turf, when they hide among civilists and recruit new members faster than rabbits reproduce

But over a thousand US soldiers were killed there, not even wanting to count those that were injured or traumatized
400 billion dollar were spent on that war

Who needs terrorists when you have your own government?



> And repeatedly denotes a series, at least more than two,


Are word technicalities all you have?
The point is that he was re-elected. 
The whole point of democracy is that the people are responsible for who gets to rule over them. 
As a result, shit happened. What's your excuse? A wizard did it?


----------



## Aokiji (Dec 3, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> America can you sink any lower ??? i'm going to donate .



...............................

It's called counter-espionage, you dolt.


----------



## Bart (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> There's no bin Laden now? Yeah, because no one heard about that guy before 9/11



No no, that was just a random post (I always use that Matrix quote for odd and irrelevant reasons lol).


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Not exactly true, CTK. You could have total transparency depending on the Country. Just, for America, ya it doesn't' work. But, there are things they are trying to shut down that should be brought to light. Nothing military-wise, sure (that involves military plans and capabilities and whatnot), but things like how unethical something is? I could see that being acceptable, would depend on the information though. There are a lot of things wikileaks has posted that aren't hurting the military in terms of capability, but hurting people in the government who have done things unethically.



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> He was called a rapist months ago...I doubt it was the banks as people are writing countless books on how evil the banks are all of the time and they're going on TV promoting them.
> 
> Leave it to you to turn this into a Conspiracy thing.
> 
> They were pissed someone was stealing classified information, no one cares about protecting the fucking banks, you can't hurt them because they have all the money.



No one cares about protecting the banks? Lol. And yes he was brought up on charges months ago, but they weren't really pushed. Now they're pushing the shit outta things and it's because he's said he's going after specific businesses and how they do things which has pissed them off and, guess what? They really do have our government bought. It's nothing conspiracy-wise. Hell, they just had the government release their own records, all of them, and we're finding out the government has been giving more money than they claimed to businesses... not JUST American either, but foreign banks and businesses. That's bullshit.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> What the flying fuck
> 
> Don't even get me started on how useful it is to fight some islamist hillbillies in their turf, when they hide among civilists and recruit new members faster than rabbits reproduce
> 
> ...



You do realize that my father came back from a war where we lost more people in one day than we have in this war? 

You do realize that it doesn't matter if they're hillbillies if they're training people to kill people in American and Western targets. 

And I think you're quoting Iraq money figures, which isn't the war I was talking about. But you know it all, they didn't need to be attacked, they only helped to blow up an embassy, a boat, a train in another country and then went on to causes one of the largest daily losses of life in the history of the US.



Vicious-chan said:


> Not exactly true, CTK. You could have total  transparency depending on the Country. Just, for America, ya it  doesn't' work. But, there are things they are trying to shut down that  should be brought to light. Nothing military-wise, sure (that involves  military plans and capabilities and whatnot), but things like how  unethical something is? I could see that being acceptable, would depend  on the information though. There are a lot of things wikileaks has  posted that aren't hurting the military in terms of capability, but  hurting people in the government who have done things  unethically.



Okay, if your country is shitty, it will work. But there's a fine balance, you can't have it all transparent, or all hidden (like a North Korea).


----------



## Nyasi (Dec 3, 2010)

Live Q&A with Julian Assange


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Okay, if your country is shitty, it will work. But there's a fine balance, you can't have it all transparent, or all hidden (like a North Korea).



True stuff. Like many things in life, it's the TRUE middle ground that's best.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You do realize that my father came back from a war where we lost more people in one day than we have in this war?


Those were terrible times and we're all glad your father survived, but what does that have to do with the NOW?


Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You do realize that it doesn't matter if they're hillbillies if they're training people to kill people in American and Western targets.


And they'll stop doing that when america comes in and fucks shit up, causing even more hate and frustration?



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> And I think you're quoting Iraq money figures, which isn't the war I was talking about. But you know it all, they didn't need to be attacked, they only helped to blow up an embassy, a boat, a train in another country and then went on to causes one of the largest daily losses of life in the history of the US.


Nope. Iraq money figures are almost twice those of the Afghanistan war. Both combined cross the 1,000,000,000,000 dollar mark already.
That's a lot of money that could have been spent on making the lives of all americans better, instead of the lives of some foreign shitheads worse.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> And they'll stop doing that when america comes in and fucks shit up, causing even more hate and frustration?



Of course they will stop it Zaru.

At least temporarily while they get back on their feet and proceed to come after us with even more vigor because we pissed them off double time.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> True stuff. Like many things in life, it's the TRUE middle ground that's best.


But the middle ground will look like a back and forth between too much. There were times during the war I wondered why they allowed journalists to report some things and indeed they had to send some of them home for giving away positions and the like. 

At the same time, there are things hidden that just don't need to be at times. Problem is I don't like the idea of foreign entities getting all the information and doing whatever they please with it, especially when I don't think most of it is surprising, avoidable or bad news.

That "you can't surrender to aircraft" thing, I think that was wikileaks. I knew that already its the truth, you can't. With good reason. It leaves the aircraft too vulnerable and puts the people flying it to risk. If you're confirmed enemies trying to surrender to an aircraft, you don't let them. 

But when that was posted here, everyone acted so appalled and shocked as if they didn't understand. Most of them couldn't see the sense in the situation and they have no idea about the truth of war or the idea that maybe, despite putting their lives on the line, soldiers don't want to die being idiots.



Final Giku Tenshou said:


> Of course they will stop it Zaru.
> 
> At least temporarily while they get back on their feet and proceed to  come after us with even more vigor because we pissed them off double  time.



So you shouldn't fight a war if your enemy will fight back? Gasp, that's a brilliant way to run your country. We'll call it the lay down and get the shit kicked out of you strategy. 

This is why I don't have to argue much, you're not making a real argument...anyone can see the flaw in that.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> So you shouldn't fight a war if your enemy will fight back? Gasp, that's a brilliant way to run your country. We'll call it the lay down and get the shit kicked out of you strategy.
> 
> This is why I don't have to argue much, you're not making a real argument...anyone can see the flaw in that.



Your argument relies on you putting words into people's mouths.

Not surprised.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Final Giku Tenshou said:


> Your argument relies on you putting words into people's mouths.
> 
> Not surprised.


No counter argument now? I didn't put words in your mouth, I repeated what you said and gave the outcome of what would happen. We tried it your way until the attacks escalated and reached our shores. 

See look, another argument because unlike you, I believe firmly in kicking a man while he's down. 

But its bed time, six in the morning is too early for me to be wasting my time repeating myself.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> No counter argument now? I didn't put words in your mouth, I repeated what you said and gave the outcome of what would happen. We tried it your way until the attacks escalated and reached our shores.



What are you talking about? You assumed I meant we shouldn't fight back when people attack us. No, that isn't what I meant at all, what I meant is exactly what's on the tin, that we shouldn't be starting wars we have no business starting.



> See look, another argument because unlike you, I believe firmly in kicking a man while he's down.



Assuming I don't believe firmly in kicking a man while he's down.



> But its bed time, six in the morning is too early for me to be wasting my time repeating myself.



I hope you have many nightmares tonight


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> So you shouldn't fight a war if your enemy will fight back? Gasp, that's a brilliant way to run your country. We'll call it the lay down and get the shit kicked out of you strategy.
> 
> This is why I don't have to argue much, you're not making a real argument...anyone can see the flaw in that.



The French way?


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

> Mill’s application of the general principles of liberty is expressed in his book On Liberty: "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and one, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind".





> The dictatorship of Adolf Hitler largely suppressed freedom of the press through Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. As the Ministry's name implies, propaganda did not carry the negative connotations that it does today (or did in the Allied countries); how-to manuals were openly distributed by that same ministry explaining the craft of effective propaganda. The Ministry also acted as a central control-point for all media, issuing orders as to what stories could be run and what stories would be suppressed. Anyone involved in the film industry—from directors to the lowliest assistant—had to sign an oath of loyalty to the Nazi Party, due to opinion-changing power Goebbels perceived movies to have. (Goebbels himself maintained some personal control over every single film made in Nazi Europe.) Journalists who crossed the Propaganda Ministry were routinely imprisoned or shot as traitors.





> I fear the newspapers more than a hundred thousand bayonets."
> — Napoleon Bonaparte



Interesting thoughts ...


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

All the wars CNN has advertized we were involved are a Lie. The only war we've been fighting and losing is the one against illegal Aliens.


----------



## Mael (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> All the wars CNN has advertized we were involved are a Lie. The only war we've been fighting and losing is the one against illegal Aliens.



Which has nothing to do with the current topic at hand.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Hi, I'll be handling the Assangebot cockriding from this point on. 

So. Let's talk about why we should donate money to a cowardly rapist who releases this kind of information without regard to the damage he's doing to the entire international community?

Because most of you seem to be under the entirely mistaken impression that American was the only country hurt by these. On the contrary, it was one of the few countries NOT hurt. To be sure, the leak itself is embarrassing, but the fact is that espionage is a fact of life. America spies on the entire world, including its allies, and - I know this might be shocking - so does everyone else.

Of course not every country has a state department with a 16 billion dollar budget.

What Assange and Wikileaks hurt with these releases is the entire international diplomatic community. Make no mistake - nobody was exaggerating when they said this will cost lives. Diplomats knowing that what they say behind closed doors might not stay there - whether or not they actually say it to the United States - means countries will be less willing to negotiate.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> To be sure, the leak itself is embarrassing, but the fact is that espionage is a fact of life. America spies on the entire world, including its allies, and - I know this might be shocking - so does everyone else.



So basically you're saying it's fine that everyone is a dick and it should stay that way forever and nobody can question it

Now Assange is being a dick to the dicks, but he's not allowed to be a dick like them?

Global hypocrisy in the world. And a lot of dick in my post.


----------



## Petenshi (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Hi, I'll be handling the Assangebot cockriding from this point on.
> 
> So. Let's talk about why we should donate money to a cowardly rapist who releases this kind of information without regard to the damage he's doing to the entire international community?
> 
> ...



If what you say is true, then the entire diplomatic community is a farce based of lies and self interest. I am not naive enough to say there is not a level of lies or self interest involved in diplomacy, but for it to based and founded off that principle defeats any reason for making it civil at all. There is no point to have a diplomatic community if people go behind others backs and say things that another might not take lightly. Diplomats should know there position requires tact and awareness of their surroundings. If everyone knows that everyone spies on everyone else, then why is it such a big issue? If you don't want someone to hear something, don't say it. 

Oh, and please show me the direct death tolls from these leaks since you believe so firmly that it will cost lives. Its complete speculation, and a I believe a red herring. The issue is wether Assange is revealing information that brings to the forefront corrupt practises of government. No one talks about the good that can come from transparent government and instead they focus on how dangerous releasing secrets are. Assange may not be the paragon of life or care about people, but I don't think he is releasing these cables for fun just to troll people.


----------



## Garfield (Dec 3, 2010)

Ford Prefect: ""It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
Arthur Dent: "You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
Ford Prefect: ""No, nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
Arthur Dent: "Odd, I thought you said it was a democracy."
Ford Prefect: "I did. It is."
Arthur Dent: "So, why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
Ford Prefect: "It honestly doesn't occur to them. They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
Arthur Dent: "You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
Ford Prefect: "Oh yes, of course."
Arthur Dent: "But, why?"
Ford Prefect: "Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

I think some people in this thread like lizards


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Petenshi said:


> If what you say is true, then the entire diplomatic community is a farce based of lies and self interest.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Come on, man. Let's use a more awesome image for its reference


----------



## Gunners (Dec 3, 2010)

Vergil said:


> Whats stopping wikileaks simply giving their info to major newspapers? They'll print it won't they?



If a major newspaper printed the story they wouldn't get the attention they so desperately crave. 

People are wrong in thinking they give two shits about enlightening society, to them this is nothing more than a circus show.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> So basically you're saying it's fine that everyone is a dick and it should stay that way forever and nobody can question it
> 
> Now Assange is being a dick to the dicks, but he's not allowed to be a dick like them?
> 
> Global hypocrisy in the world. And a lot of dick in my post.





Petenshi said:


> If what you say is true, then the entire diplomatic community is a farce based of lies and self interest. I am not naive enough to say there is not a level of lies or self interest involved in diplomacy, but for it to based and founded off that principle defeats any reason for making it civil at all. There is no point to have a diplomatic community if people go behind others backs and say things that another might not take lightly.


There's rules you follow when being a dick. The rules keep everything on the straight and narrow and prevents your dickishness from derailing the entire institution of diplomacy.
For instance, these revelations that most of the Middle East actively encourages the US to blow Iran the fuck up. 
Don't you think it would be directly in America's interests to maybe covertly leak that somewhere? It makes Iran look like the utter shitpile it is when even their violently Anti-American Muslim fundamentalist neighbors want them killed. 
But it didn't, because in the long run, violating the rules of diplomacy - letting the ignorant masses (that's us) know what's going on - would cause enormously more harm than good. America would no longer be able to negotiate with these countries in positions of honesty. They'd assume that what they say will eventually get out, so even behind closed doors they'd follow the DEATH TO ISRAEL GLORY TO THE ISLAMIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF IRAN bullshit line they feed their retarded people.


> Diplomats should know there position requires tact and awareness of their surroundings. If everyone knows that everyone spies on everyone else, then why is it such a big issue? If you don't want someone to hear something, don't say it.


It's such a big issue because WE, the retarded masses (and don't try to debate that, as a collective, we are retarded) know about it, and that's unacceptable.



> Oh, and please show me the direct death tolls from these leaks since you believe so firmly that it will cost lives. Its complete speculation, and a I believe a red herring.


I can't show you any, because it hasn't happened yet. But when nations can't bring their grievances to the negotiating table without assurances of confidentiality, the alternative is conflict. 

Look at all these countries which are publicly hostile to Israel, but were nevertheless negotiating with them in private, because their citizenry has such a blind hatred of Israel they would never support public negotiations, and the same is likely true of the Israeli people.
From this point onward, you can pretty much assume there will be a lot more bullets between these countries than words. 

And I know it's tempting to be angry and contrary when I say that governments don't trust their people, but it's a fact of life that 90% of the people in the world know next to nothing about the complex political situations they have opinions regarding. The fact that so many of these cables were such revelations proves it. Some were obvious, like "Putin's a boss" but some were borderline unimaginable. The Men in Black said "The person is smart, the people are stupid" which was an excellent rephrasing of Thomas Jefferson's "The masses are asses". 
How can we possibly claim the right to determine statecraft when we're so ignorant of it? These cables were originally send precisely to give diplomats a better picture of what they're dealing with.

And Good Lord, don't say "well now we're informed" because no, we aren't. Not only were these the lowest levels of classified documents, but we don't have educations or experience in the field.


----------



## Garfield (Dec 3, 2010)

> America would no longer be able to negotiate with these countries in positions of *honesty*. They'd assume that what they say will eventually get out, so even behind closed doors they'd follow the DEATH TO ISRAEL GLORY TO THE ISLAMIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF IRAN bullshit line they feed their retarded people.


Is it just me or does that seem a bit contradictory


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

adee said:


> Is it just me or does that seem a bit contradictory



No, America and Honestly is just an oxymoron 

You don't think people across the globe say shit behind closed doors about America?

Confucius would say you stupid if that the case.


----------



## LifeMaker (Dec 3, 2010)

well there is an old quote saying Diplomacy is the art of lying to your friends and telling the truth to your enemies... 

I wanted the banking files, not these diplomatic ones...


----------



## Dionysus (Dec 3, 2010)

If this were China have its shit leaked, I can guarantee you most of the people criticizing this would be cheering Wikileaks instead. Not to say you don't have your own self-interest, but at least know there is hypocrisy involved.

[Insert snide remark about being perfect for the diplomatic world.]



Gunners said:


> If a major newspaper printed the story they wouldn't get the attention they so desperately crave.
> 
> People are wrong in thinking they give two shits about enlightening society, to them this is nothing more than a circus show.



They did give them to newspapers and other news outlets.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Gunners said:


> If a major newspaper printed the story they wouldn't get the attention they so desperately crave.



Look, it's someone who doesn't read news outside NF!

As I bought the monday issue of the german Spiegel, one of the MAJOR NEWSPAPERS FROM SEVERAL COUNTRIES THAT WERE INVOLVED IN A MONTHS-LONG PROCESS OF EVALUATING WIKILEAKS MATERIAL IN COOPERATION WITH WIKILEAKS, I can tell you that you're good ol'fashioned wrong.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

adee said:


> Is it just me or does that seem a bit contradictory


It's not, not in the slightest.
Obviously Diplomacy is the art of getting what you want. So yes, everything that's been said in this thread about it being self-serving and whatnot? Absolutely true.
But to go back to the black-and-white Israeli example, Israel would like to not suffer suicide bombers in shopping malls. Palestine would like to not have babies killed with helicopter gunships.
To even admit to each other that they have places at the negotiating table and holding talks is being a LOT more honest with each other than they're being with their own people.
That's honesty in diplomacy.
Take away the confidentiality, and you can no longer say one thing publicly and do another privately. And that harms diplomacy severely.



Final Giku Tenshou said:


> No, America and Honestly is just an oxymoron
> 
> You don't think people across the globe say shit behind closed doors about America?
> 
> Confucius would say you stupid if that the case.


Confucius say: Man with head too far up ass can't see shit.



Mashed Potato said:


> If this were China have its shit leaked, I can guarantee you most of the people criticizing this would be cheering Wikileaks instead. Not to say you don't have your own self-interest, but at least know there is hypocrisy involved.


I hate the shit out of China and I most certainly would not be cheering Wikileaks, not least of all because it would contain a lot more embarrassing assumptions about the US and a lot less about China (the little fucking ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) WERE hacking us!), but most of all because, as with this leak, this fucks the entire diplomatic community.


----------



## Gunners (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> Look, it's someone who doesn't read news outside NF!
> 
> As I bought the monday issue of the german Spiegel, one of the MAJOR NEWSPAPERS FROM SEVERAL COUNTRIES THAT WERE INVOLVED IN A MONTHS-LONG PROCESS OF EVALUATING WIKILEAKS MATERIAL IN COOPERATION WITH WIKILEAKS, I can tell you that you're good ol'fashioned wrong.



You could tell me I'm wrong without being a rude little prick.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Dec 3, 2010)

I heard it's back on line


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

France seeks to bar hosting WikiLeaks website
Even liberal France, which loves trolling the US, is shutting Wikileaks down before they even think of moving to France. 

Because - and I'm going to keep posting this until you like it - Wikileaks is attacking the whole world, not the US.



makeoutparadise said:


> I heard it's back on line





NOPE 

Also Assange is a rapist. Let's discuss that.


----------



## Stalin (Dec 3, 2010)

Really, why do people cheer for these fuckers? Besides, its not like we really needed to know any of this info. This info sounds to me like garden variety government corruption on a global scale that the exposure of could hurt diplomatic relations


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Because - and I'm going to keep posting this until you like it - Wikileaks is attacking the whole world, not the US.


Agreed, and I find it funny how some people here claim they're only attacking the US exclusively.



Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Also Assange is a rapist. Let's discuss that.


Accused rapist. Which, as we know, is the easiest accusation to make, ever, and people start believing it. His reputation will be stained even if those faceless chicks never appear in court, and regardless of the outcome of a possible trial.

And how many non-convicted rapists do you know that are searched by interpol? 


Gunners said:


> You could tell me I'm wrong without being a rude little prick.



Sorry man, the general dissent in this thread is affecting me


----------



## Megaharrison (Dec 3, 2010)

No duh the system provider would withdraw its services, in the eyes of the law wikileaks is engaging in criminal activity. You can naively say that everyone "deserves" to know everything every government does at every time, but that doesn't mean this activity isn't illegal.


----------



## Stalin (Dec 3, 2010)

Besides, its not like the majority of info they leaked are stuff that people should give two shits about.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> Accused rapist. Which, as we know, is the easiest accusation to make, ever, and people start believing it. His reputation will be stained even if those faceless chicks never appear in court, and regardless of the outcome of a possible trial.
> 
> And how many non-convicted rapists do you know that are searched by interpol?


Well the thing in this case is that not only are there the two separate women who're claiming two separate incidents, but Assange admits to having had sex with them.

That pretty much blows the "it's a setup" argument right out the window, because you can't just go around to a person's past sexual partners and go "hey, we'll give you x dollars to say you were raped". Some will take you up on it, of course, but some have integrity, and then the word's out you're trying to smear someone with rape charges. 

About Interpol chasing him, I dunno. Might be international pressure on them to fuck him over, might be the fact that he changes countries like we change pants.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Well the thing in this case is that not only are there the two separate women who're claiming two separate incidents, but Assange admits to having had sex with them.
> 
> That pretty much blows the "it's a setup" argument right out the window, because you can't just go around to a person's past sexual partners and go "hey, we'll give you x dollars to say you were raped". Some will take you up on it, of course, but some have integrity, and then the word's out you're trying to smear someone with rape charges.
> 
> About Interpol chasing him, I dunno. Might be international pressure on them to fuck him over, might be the fact that he changes countries like we change pants.


Integrity?
Yeah it's totally impossible that the same forces that can put PRESSURE ON INTERPOL AND ENTIRE COUNTRIES don't have the means of convincing some random women of being part of a dirt campaign, right?

Blue, if the CIA was telling you to accuse some rather random person of a crime while getting possible benefits, the only alternative being disappearing forever in some bodybag (or [insert other terrible outcome here]), would you keep your integrity? That's assuming those women had any to begin with.

The joke is that they're not chasing him for what he does for a living(hint: they can't!) officially, but unofficially(although everyone realizes they do) chase him for what he does for a living.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> Blue, if the CIA was telling you to accuse some rather random person of a crime while getting possible benefits, the only alternative being disappearing forever in some bodybag (or [insert other terrible outcome here]), would you keep your integrity? That's assuming those women had any to begin with.


Don't be absurd. Even if the CIA made a habit of harming the citizens of other countries (who aren't in Guantanamo), which they don't for several extremely important reasons related to getting absolutely crucified by the international community for fucking with foreign citizens for no (good) reason, all any of them would have to do is go public with it and they're untouchable.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Don't be absurd. Even if the CIA made a habit of harming the citizens of other countries (who aren't in Guantanamo), which they don't for several extremely important reasons related to getting absolutely crucified by the international community for fucking with foreign citizens for no (good) reason, all any of them would have to do is go public with it and they're untouchable.



You're telling me the USA has no way of influencing people in a secretive way.

I thought you had more trust in your country's power, Blue


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> You're telling me the USA has no way of influencing people in a secretive way.



Hell yes we do. Money, and lots of it.

But there are some women, surprisingly, who won't say they've been raped for a nickel. Or a million nickels, as the case might be.

If Assange hadn't admitted to having had sex with these two, then I'd assume it was a smear campaign, yeah. It's easy to find people in your circle of influence to claim whatever you want them to claim. 

Of course, it would probably be extremely simple to prove they actually did have sex, so regardless of his guilt, admitting that was the right way to go.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Don't be absurd. Even if the CIA made a habit of harming the citizens of other countries (who aren't in Guantanamo), which they don't for several extremely important reasons related to getting absolutely crucified by the international community for fucking with foreign citizens for no (good) reason, all any of them would have to do is go public with it and they're untouchable.



Lolz, oh the naivety of what our CIA has done and still most likely does. If not the CIA, another one of our 16 or so government agencies promoting "National Security." Oh well.


----------



## Hinako (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> Yeah!! .. Americans can never stoop as low as chinese and block flow of information.


We wouldn't allow child porn on the web as it is wrong and vile. Blocking this crap is no different.


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

@ Hinako -- Yeah lets create many straw men and a straw village 



Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Hell yes we do. Money, and lots of it.
> 
> But there are some women, surprisingly, who won't say they've been raped for a nickel. Or a million nickels, as the case might be.
> 
> ...



Well If u did have sex with a few girls and one of them accuses u of rape one fine day when u suddenly become famous it means she is being honest.


----------



## Punpun (Dec 3, 2010)

Pff you guys are blinded. The leaks are from the CIA, look what we can understand from the leaks : - Iran is a tyranny and  the Arab world beg for USA to act.

The truth here. 


*Spoiler*: __ 



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCE5JJD-dIg[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Lolz, oh the naivety of what our CIA has done and still most likely does. If not the CIA, another one of our 16 or so government agencies promoting "National Security." Oh well.


What, tried to kill Castro with exploding cigars?
That certainly went well.

The CIA is actually represented extremely well in James Bond flicks. Bond goes in, gets in a gunfight, assassinates the villian, fucks the women.

The CIA shows up for 5 minutes with guns and money when Bond needs them, and isn't seen again for the rest of the movie.


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Mandom said:


> Pff you guys are blinded. The leaks are from the CIA, look what we can understand from the leaks : - Iran is a tyranny and  the Arab world beg for USA to act.
> 
> The truth here.
> 
> ...



In a battle of different thought leaders u lose because the one who used US patriotism as leverage won most votes


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> Well If u did have sex with a few girls and one of them accuses u of rape one fine day when u suddenly become famous it means she is being honest.


Two of them tho! Both staying anonymous. Doesn't smell like gold digging.


----------



## Hinako (Dec 3, 2010)

Not a strawman, it's pretty relevant. The government already controlling the internet one way or another before the wikileaks coming down. I think it's time for you to realize that.


----------



## EvilMoogle (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> fuck freedom of speech



How is this a freedom of speech issue?  A private company canceled their contract with another group based on a business need.

Government wasn't involved at all.  The DNS will be back up under a different host as soon as they can find one.


----------



## Draffut (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> fuck freedom of speech





xenopyre said:


> America can you sink any lower ??? i'm going to donate .





PerveeSage said:


> And so, communist America begins.



The government had nothing to do with taking it down.  If a private company decides to stop providing their means of freedom of speech because it hurts them financially, thats not communist.  That's capitalism.  Nor is it impeding your freedom of speech.


----------



## Botzu (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> *Also Assange is a rapist. Let's discuss that.*


[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvhv7wXiHa8[/YOUTUBE]
:d


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Two of them tho! Both staying anonymous. Doesn't smell like gold digging.



Well I wonder why they weren't seriously before in countries which actually take law seriously. ( of course if u can show me that the cases were open before he started wikileaks then i must agree with u )



> How is this a freedom of speech issue? A private company canceled their contract with another group based on a business need.
> 
> Government wasn't involved at all. The DNS will be back up under a different host as soon as they can find one.



 This sounds very naive ....


----------



## Outlandish (Dec 3, 2010)

CTK is like  MH only American styled, though he's not trained in the art of propaganda ... yet


----------



## makeoutparadise (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> NOPE



YOU LIE!!! 

*Wikileaks forced to change domain*



> EveryDNS.net said it had terminated services because Wikileaks.org had come under massive cyber attacks.
> 
> *But Wikileaks has already reappeared using a Swiss web address.*


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11907641


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Botzu said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvhv7wXiHa8[/YOUTUBE]
> :d



I literally just shouted 

WHAT A FUCKING ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) OH MY GOD

Out loud just now.

Here is this worthless overweight piece of shit whose four main arguments are

1. It's too much of a coincidence!
2. Come on.
3. He's attacking a bank! It's all about money! They're selling him out!
4. Come on!

And then he ends the segment with product placement and a sponsorship, completely ripping the rug out from under any credibility he could possibly have on the subject.


----------



## Qhorin Halfhand (Dec 3, 2010)

The Swedish mirror is not working for me. This one  seems to work though.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> I literally just shouted
> 
> WHAT A FUCKING ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) OH MY GOD
> 
> ...



As if your argument is any better?

1) I hate wikileaks, you should too
2) There are TWO women! Clearly both can't be lying!
3) Come on!!

Ya... I'm not saying he didn't rape anyone, but I am also pretty damn skeptical.


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> I literally just shouted
> 
> WHAT A FUCKING ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) OH MY GOD
> 
> ...



So u are using Ad hominem attacks now  , U are not biased or hypocritic at all  ( see what I did there )


----------



## Nemesis (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Also Assange is a rapist. Let's discuss that.



Why not

The whole thing started because he had CONSENSUAL sex with a woman without a condom.  She called someone in his staff about it asking if he had a history of STDs.  Unfortunately the person she called was also someone he had been having CONSENSUAL sex with.

She finding out he was sleeping around was the first to press charges of rape.  But then they dropped it, there was no evidence to suggest it either and only a few weeks later was it brought back up.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> As if your argument is any better?
> 
> 1) I hate wikileaks, you should too
> 2) There are TWO women! Clearly both can't be lying!
> ...


My argument is fucking excellent. He admitted to having sex with these women, pretty much completely ruling out their status as government patsies. 

If you have sex with someone, that means you're probably kind of fond of them. Approaching people like that, as a government agency, and asking them to completely ruin his life forever? Knowing that whatever you're bribing them is nothing next to what they'd make on the talk show circuit, talking about how the CIA asked them to falsify rape charges?
That's beyond risky, that's insane.

Who's the skeptic here?



Nemesis said:


> Why not
> 
> The whole thing started because he had CONSENSUAL sex with a woman without a condom.  She called someone in his staff about it asking if he had a history of STDs.  Unfortunately the person she called was also someone he had been having CONSENSUAL sex with.
> 
> She finding out he was sleeping around was the first to press charges of rape.  But then they dropped it, there was no evidence to suggest it either and only a few weeks later was it brought back up.



Source!

Fatty said that one of the rape charges was related to a condom breaking and him not pulling out in a timely fashion, not a condom not being used. 
Which sounds innocent until you realize that... women can interrupt sex too.

Unless they're being held down and forced into it.

And the fat guy isn't here, so it wasn't really meant as an ad hominem attack. I'm just really disgusted with him.


----------



## Dionysus (Dec 3, 2010)

Megaharrison said:


> No duh the system provider would withdraw its services, in the eyes of the law wikileaks is engaging in criminal activity. You can naively say that everyone "deserves" to know everything every government does at every time, but that doesn't mean this activity isn't illegal.


You'll have to specify which country's legal system you're using here to define this illegal. It's not illegal in the US, nor in any European country I know. Hence you don't see any arrest warrants nor raids to close down the servers.

You do see behind-the-scenes DDOS attacks though. Pretty sure they're illegal in most of Europe and NA. It'd be interesting to hear who is carrying it out. 



Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> I hate the shit out of China and I most certainly would not be cheering Wikileaks, not least of all because it would contain a lot more embarrassing assumptions about the US and a lot less about China (the little fucking ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) WERE hacking us!), but most of all because, as with this leak, this fucks the entire diplomatic community.


Not so sure I believe you here. You seem the sort to want to have China's diplomatic power stunted. The information is a lot of these is not the story. The story is more the duplicitous and self-serving nature of world leaders and their toadies. But, maybe you wouldn't support it.

Regardless, appealing to authority or the status quo isn't very convincing. I like the idea that everything can be known, that the people who affect the lives of everyone on the planet might just have to be honest dealers. Frankly, I don't assume the diplomats of the world or even the political leaders of my country have my best interests in mind. I can evaluate my fortunes more if I know what they're doing, why they do it, how they do it. This is why I support full disclosure from all public institutions.

Most of this is tripe, interesting as it may be. I still support it seeing the light of day.

Now, there is the question of military matters. Under certain circumstances things should remain confidential only lest another party who doesn't have my best interests in mind gain an advantage from it. However, these are diplomatic cables and, thus, this is a separate topic.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> fuck freedom of speech



Seriously, just fuck Freedom of Speech. Just look at this thread and the general populace. The hairless apes have repeatedly shown that they don't deserve this *privilige*.
But by all means, keep whining Assangebots.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> My argument is fucking excellent. He admitted to having sex with these women, pretty much completely ruling out their status as government patsies.
> 
> If you have sex with someone, that means you're probably kind of fond of them. Approaching people like that, as a government agency, and asking them to completely ruin his life forever? Knowing that whatever you're bribing them is nothing next to what they'd make on the talk show circuit, talking about how the CIA asked them to falsify rape charges?
> That's beyond risky, that's insane.
> ...



I never said they were government patsies... doesn't mean they both don't want some "easy money" or some other agenda now that he's famous, as was stated before. There's plenty of reasons. I'm also not saying he didn't do it, I'm just saying it's pretty damn convenient that right now it's all coming out.. why not when it happened exactly? Hell, maybe the banks or businesses he's going after found these women he did have sex with and paid them to come out. That's not necessarily what happened, but it's a probability. And if you think they can't find that information out (or you can't), well, you can. Information is cheap in this modern era. Just a matter of time, not even necessarily large amounts.

Your arguments aren't excellent or flawless. They're not wrong, necessarily, but they're no more perfect either. You're not right because you think you are.


----------



## Zaru (Dec 3, 2010)

> If you have sex with someone, that means you're probably kind of fond of them.



Rofl Blue u srs


----------



## Botzu (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Source!
> 
> Fatty said that one of the rape charges was related to a condom breaking and him not pulling out in a timely fashion, not a condom not being used.
> Which sounds innocent until you realize that... women can interrupt sex too.
> ...



"Both the prosecutor and the defence agree that it was an incident of consensual sex where the condom broke. They are saying that amounts to rape, we are saying it doesn't," he added.



And


> A Stockholm prosecutor issued the arrest warrant on Friday, saying Assange was suspected of rape and molestation in two separate cases. But chief prosecutor Eva Finne withdrew the warrant within 24 hours.
> 
> "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," Finne said in a brief statement.




What evidence do you have now, that you suspect that he did it, when months ago when they first filed it the case was dismissed 24 hours later with no reason to suspect he committed the rape?


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> My argument is fucking excellent. He admitted to having sex with these women, pretty much completely ruling out their status as government patsies.
> 
> If you have sex with someone, that means you're probably kind of fond of them. Approaching people like that, as a government agency, and asking them to completely ruin his life forever? Knowing that whatever you're bribing them is nothing next to what they'd make on the talk show circuit, talking about how the CIA asked them to falsify rape charges?
> That's beyond risky, that's insane.
> ...



yoou did attack hiis credibility and dint really attack his argumnt


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> yoou did attack hiis credibility and dint really attack his argumnt


He didn't have one.

1. "It's too much of a a coincidence" is not an argument
2. "One of the charges of the women is, "oh, we were having consensual sex, and then the condom broke, and he didn't take it out in time.""

Whoa whoa whoa wait a minute fatty. Women can stop sex too. If she couldn't, that's clear-cut rape. 
3. ITS ALL MONEY is not an argument.
4. LOOK ITS A BIG SWORD, THROUGH THE WORLD THAT'S SERIOUS
No you fucking retard, that's the Interpol logo.

Did you really take this meat tank seriously?
Yeah, more ad hominem, sue me. This guy doesn't deserve rational debate.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> This sounds very naive ....



That isn't naive. That's the truth of the situation. Stop using words if you don't know what they mean.



Outlandish said:


> CTK is like  MH only American styled, though he's not trained in the art of propaganda ... yet



That's ironic coming from one of the guys who'll go as far as defend child rape for the sake of their prophet.


----------



## Shɑnɑ (Dec 3, 2010)

I'll miss all the hatred for this guy 

I don't think posting classified documents is freedom of speech really, but I do think we as Americans rightfully deserve to see what the hells is going on with our governments/military etc.


----------



## Keile (Dec 3, 2010)

Mashed Potato said:


> Regardless, appealing to authority or the status quo isn't very convincing.



Anarchism, lol. I don't like the status quo either, and would rebuild it if given the chance, but that doesn't mean I support this Batman shit. 



> I like the idea that everything can be known, that the people who affect the lives of everyone on the planet might just have to be honest dealers.



Weak logic here. 

(A) =/= B or C

But rather (A) = (D)

(A) More illegal release of classified documents does not necessarily (B) countries will become more "honest" with their dealings or (C) cease the use of black operations if in the best interest of the state to do so.

All this has really done is (D) make world powers like the United States and France more protective of their secret information. As we speak, the US Senate is voting to amend the Espionage Act, which would essentially remake Assange into a common international criminal. Moreover, secretive US documents are being hidden even further from the public eye.  In effect, all Wikileaks has done is exactly the opposite of what it intended: countries now will be more dishonest and less straightforward. 



> Frankly, I don't assume the diplomats of the world or even the political leaders of my country have my best interests in mind. I can evaluate my fortunes more if I know what they're doing, why they do it, how they do it. This is why I support full disclosure from all public institutions.



There are better, less harmful ways to go about investigating the US government than the release of diplomatic cables.

Plus, it doesn't make any sense for everyone to know everything. A true democracy such as that has never worked. 



> Now, there is the question of military matters. Under certain circumstances things should remain confidential only lest another party who doesn't have my best interests in mind gain an advantage from it. However, these are diplomatic cables and, thus, this is a separate topic.



These documents offer more than a competitive advantage with regards to foreign nations interested in negotiating with the US:

"
WikiLeaks cables claim first scalp as German minister's aide is sacked

Helmut Metzner admitted acting as a mole for the US embassy during negotiations to form a government

An example of what Wikileaks has already cost the United States.


----------



## Captain America (Dec 3, 2010)

Yeah, nothing too new though.


----------



## Punpun (Dec 3, 2010)

Come on some of the leaks are like dated from 2005/2006. You can't tell it fresh news....


----------



## Asmodeus (Dec 3, 2010)

No one who's opinion matters was shocked by anything that was said. 

All governments make these assessments of other World Leaders, it's just part of the game. 

The U.S. had its cables leaked because Assange has an agenda. That's all.


----------



## Keile (Dec 3, 2010)

Asmodeus said:


> The U.S. had its cables leaked because Assange has an agenda. That's all.



Short and sweet. Good post.


----------



## Keile (Dec 3, 2010)

From the Washington post:

"At this point, we are beyond indictments and courts. The damage has been done; people have died - and will die because of the actions of this puerile, self-absorbed narcissist. News reports say the WikiLeaks founder is hiding out in England. If that's true, we should treat Mr. Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him.

I agree.


----------



## Platinum (Dec 3, 2010)

I'm honestly surprised it took this long.


----------



## Nodonn (Dec 3, 2010)

I'd like to know who died please.


----------



## |)/-\\/\/|\| (Dec 3, 2010)

Hopefully it should be back soon, maybe in some other domain name. Humanity has the right to know about all the shit that's happening. Anyone who disagrees disgusts me.


----------



## Keile (Dec 3, 2010)

|)/-\\/\/|\| said:


> Hopefully it should be back soon, maybe in some other domain name. The people of the earth has the right to know about all the shit that's fucking them.




The people of the Earth have no enshrined RIGHT to know anything with regards to classified US documents.

One can make the argument that Americans have a right to question US secrecy, but non-Americans do not.

Besides, who the hell thinks the world is in concert? Why do you believe everyone is being fucked over by the US? Do you believe we're äll-in-this-together? That the rise of Europe did not happen at the demise of Africa?

That China's prominence has nothing to do with America's failings?


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

The people of the US have a right to know how our own government is run though.. don't we? I'd say we do. As you even seem to claim there is an argument... still... why can't we get these pages of information?

Honestly, I could very well see the US have an area set up for US citizens to gain the information after proving they're US citizens. There would be risk at leaks more so, but oh well. I'd still say our people deserve to know what our government is doing.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Dec 3, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> America can you sink any lower ??? i'm going to donate .





abcd said:


> Yeah!! .. Americans can never stoop as low as chinese and block flow of information.



These. 

Wikileaks is already back online and I'm reading them now.



Gunners said:


> If a major newspaper printed the story they wouldn't get the attention they so desperately crave.
> 
> People are wrong in thinking they give two shits about enlightening society, to them this is nothing more than a circus show.





Zaru said:


> Look, it's someone who doesn't read news outside NF!
> 
> As I bought the monday issue of the german Spiegel, one of the MAJOR NEWSPAPERS FROM SEVERAL COUNTRIES THAT WERE INVOLVED IN A MONTHS-LONG PROCESS OF EVALUATING WIKILEAKS MATERIAL IN COOPERATION WITH WIKILEAKS, I can tell you that you're good ol'fashioned wrong.





But really, they do this with all of their leaks. The general ignorance from the anti-Wikileaks crowd is shocking.

False "fachts": 

1) They do it to up their hits on Wikileaks (Zaru took care of that)
2) They only target the US (>80% of their leaks have nothing to do with the USA)


----------



## Keile (Dec 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> The people of the US have a right to know how our own government is run though.. don't we? I'd say we do.




In a perfect world, this would be the case. However, it is not practical to make everyone aware of secret documents. Doing so presents too much of a risk that people who do not have a right to US information may come to obtain it, thus making it excruciating more difficult to conduct foreign relation missions.

In addition, one must realize that what the public wants is not always in the best interest of the democracy. Democratically elected officials must have the ability to make responsible decisions on issues of which they hold expertise without fear of populist reprisal. Studies have shown judges operate best when they are not elected by the public.



> As you even seem to claim there is an argument... still... why can't we get these pages of information?



Too dangerous. Plus, it would open the door to populism. 

The American citizen gives his opinion when he votes. He assumes his public officials will do the right thing.



> Honestly, I could very well see the US have an area set up for US citizens to gain the information after proving they're US citizens. There would be risk at leaks more so, but oh well. I'd still say our people deserve to know what our government is doing.



Too risky. The US is powerful because of its secrecy.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Dec 3, 2010)

The US is powerful because of many other things, actually.

And there's no reason a lot of things going on shouldn't be displayed to the public in the government. The reason they aren't is because they know it's wrong and would piss off the American people and it's not IN the American people's benefits, but instead to a select few.


----------



## Garfield (Dec 3, 2010)

How is wikileaks "attacking" anyone?  If anything they seem to be Robin Hoods of intelligence data


----------



## Keile (Dec 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> The US is powerful because of many other things, actually.



One of those things is secrecy with regards to government. That's my point. 



> And there's no reason a lot of things going on shouldn't be displayed to the public in the government.



I have given you crucial reasons, when only one is really necessary:

- US diplomacy
- Security concerns



> The reason they aren't is because they know it's wrong and would piss off the American people and it's not IN the American people's benefits, but instead to a select few.



Wrong.

- Effective and efficient US diplomacy is in the best interest of all Americans.

- Populism is a risk, yes.


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> He didn't have one.
> 
> 1. "It's too much of a a coincidence" is not an argument
> 2. "One of the charges of the women is, "oh, we were having consensual sex, and then the condom broke, and he didn't take it out in time.""
> ...



does "innocent unless proven guilty" ..... ring a bell ?


Seto Kaiba said:


> That isn't naive. That's the truth of the situation. Stop using words if you don't know what they mean.


Why are u attacking me instead of tacking the argument ?... What does naive mean ?


Keile said:


> From the Washington post:
> 
> "At this point, we are beyond indictments and courts. The damage has been done;* people have died - and will die *because of the actions of this puerile, self-absorbed narcissist. News reports say the WikiLeaks founder is hiding out in England. If that's true, we should treat Mr. Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him.
> 
> I agree.


People have died ????


----------



## Punpun (Dec 3, 2010)

Yeah, people have died when the leaks were .. leaked.

Afterall people also died during the time I typed this message.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Dec 3, 2010)

adee said:


> How is wikileaks "attacking" anyone?  If anything they seem to be Robin Hoods of intelligence data



They're not. But so many have been brainwashed by the state. 

You still see lies repeated such as "it endangers the safety of X." These are diplomatic cables, stuff that low-level diplomats have access to, and logically won't endanger anyone. But since the White House said it, they reflexively repeat it. Propaganda turns their minds off to reality. They don't even think, they've been conditioned like a dog trained to fetch. Look at the other reflexive attacks against Wikileaks in this thread that are factually inaccurate. My favorite is "Wikileaks only puts out stuff attacking the US." You can verify this is not true simply by reading their list of leaks over the years, on their website or Wikipedia or wherever.

The most hilarious part is that those same people probably sat as schoolchildren in history class listening to how some horrible government in the past made so many of their own citizens believe a lie. Some of them probably even read _1984_ and thought themselves as being immune to perception-altering government influence. And they probably wondered how so many could just believe a lie that doesn't stand up under critical examination. Well, they have now answered their own question.


----------



## Garfield (Dec 3, 2010)

Mandom said:


> Yeah, people die have died when the leaks were .. leaked.
> 
> Afterall people also died during the time I typed this message.


Truth: It kills, please tread with caution.

If anything, blame the truthsayer


----------



## Qhorin Halfhand (Dec 3, 2010)

About Australia making problems for wikileaks founder, does anyone have any details on that? Is what they are doing even legal? I haven't paid much attention to that so I would like more details...


----------



## Ceria (Dec 3, 2010)

That's got to be one of the greatest trolls of all time, an american provider.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

The Pentagon & The State Department have publicly denied taking any action that resulted in shutting Wikileaks down... But behind closed doors the international community is happy that the U.S. dealt with this annoyance.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> The Pentagon & The State Department have publicly denied taking any action that resulted in shutting Wikileaks down... But behind closed doors the international community is happy that the U.S. dealt with this annoyance.


Even if it proved to be true that the government had nothing to do with this, people would still be in here whining and butthurt about the oppressive US.

Even then, no one really would think it was anyone but the government (unless the banks hired someone to do it).


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Wikileaks' founder arrest "soon"
The siren's wail and whining
Tells us he'll be found ~

I can almost hear the hounds...



abcd said:


> does "innocent unless proven guilty" ..... ring a bell ?


"Arrest"
"Trial"
"Jury of peers"
Ring bells?



Shinigami Perv said:


> They're not. But so many have been brainwashed by the state.


They're attacking the entire world diplomatic community. I've been over this. 


Fears that terrorists may acquire Pakistani nuclear material
  Several Arab leaders urged attack on Iran over nuclear issue
   China's changing relationship with North Korea
   Yemen approved US strikes on militants
   Afghan leader Hamid Karzai freed dangerous detainees
    Russia is a "virtual mafia state" with widespread corruption and bribery
    Afghan President Hamid Karzai is "paranoid and weak"

This is stuff that more than one country knew, on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Yet to the general public, they're revelations. The reason is that releasing them all serves nobody except the narcissistic asshat hiding in an English hotel room.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Wikileaks' founder arrest "soon"
> The siren's wail and whining
> Tells us he'll be found ~
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, they reported this? I've known that since I was like ten...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> does "innocent unless proven guilty" ..... ring a bell ?
> 
> Why are u attacking me instead of tacking the argument ?... What does naive mean ?



I'm attacking you and whatever flimsy argument you may have, if any. You keep using terms you clearly don't know the meaning of and you are doing it again.


----------



## PerveeSage (Dec 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> We are FAR from being communist in any way. Don't throw around terms if you don't know what they mean.



No, you only think we are far from being communist. The truth is the American government is publicly upholding traditional American values in freedom, while privately crossing the freedom line constantly. I am American, and though it aches to see an organization like wiki lay siege to the very government which prevents terrorist attacks against me, I still support freedom of speech, and the fact that journalism is the only method of truly keeping a government honest. Go watch "good night and good luck".


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> No, you only think we are far from being communist. The truth is the American government is publicly upholding traditional American values in freedom, while privately crossing the freedom line constantly. I am American, and though it aches to see an organization like wiki lay siege to the very government which prevents terrorist attacks against me, I still support freedom of speech, and the fact that journalism is the only method of truly keeping a government honest. Go watch "good night and good luck".



Prove it was actually the government and not other things. They were already losing their domain as it was reported Amazon wouldn't host them anymore, but you know, make an entire argument based on assumptions, that will help the cause.


----------



## Mikaveli (Dec 3, 2010)

Sucks,             bro.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> No, you only think we are far from being communist.



I don't think we are, I know we are. You are just throwing around a term that is associated with anything bad in this country without full knowledge of its meaning.



> The truth is the American government is publicly upholding traditional American values in freedom, while privately crossing the freedom line constantly. I



The government has engaged in acts and passed certain measures that I highly disapprove of, they have for a very long time. Many that I do think infringe's on an individuals rights and that should cease, but by and large we do retain many of our basic freedoms. 



> am American, and though it aches to see an organization like wiki lay siege to the very government which prevents terrorist attacks against me, I still support freedom of speech, and the fact that journalism is the only method of truly keeping a government honest. Go watch "good night and good luck".



Again, freedom of speech and freedom of the press does not mean you get to say absolutely anything you want and release any type of information you want. Wikileaks has already engaged in criminal acts by releasing private information of individuals without their consent, and releasing information that could compromise international relations. Like I stated to abcd, I'll state to you that you guys throw around terms while showing that you clearly don't know what the fuck they mean. 

To add, it was a private company that shut down wikileaks, not the U.S. government anyways. 

I'm all for whistle-blowing on atrocities and such, something which the media already did, I'm not behind the type of reckless and irresponsible journalism Wikileaks had been practicing for the longest time.


----------



## PerveeSage (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Prove it was actually the government and not other things. They were already losing their domain as it was reported Amazon wouldn't host them anymore, but you know, make an entire argument based on assumptions, that will help the cause.



Not enough time for me to prove it. I am too busy fighting off a crumbling economy, rampant employment rate and hyper inflated dollar. Oh, and there is a drug war going on at a border less than a hundred miles from where I live. I have about as much time as it takes for me to finish my coffee and breakfast while I read articles on the net.

Anyways, paying attention to news like I do, not only does the circumstantial evidence make itself clear, but there is no lack of direct pressure from the US government. The government may not have pulled the pin, but it provided the grenade.


----------



## Raiden (Dec 3, 2010)

Zaru said:


> So yeah I don't really think the USA has any right to complain about someone telling on them.



We don't have a right to complain about a move that has caused political instability, that adds to a list of problems for our already struggling president?

While I am not completely against what Assange has done, he is wrong. He risked global political stability by releasing all those documents.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

Communism does not automatically mean a lack of freedom of speech. You can theoretically have a communist state with free speech.

You just don't in practicality because communism is a really sucky form of economics (economics, not politics) and if you let people talk about it, they'll change it.


----------



## PerveeSage (Dec 3, 2010)

Perhaps we need to clarify our definitions of communism. I am aware of the original definition where its all about well fare. The communism I refer to is more like Chinese communism, where you get put in jail for your freedom of speech, like Liu Xiaobo.


----------



## thiagocampos (Dec 3, 2010)

too bad for the guy


----------



## Nemesis (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> Perhaps we need to clarify our definitions of communism. I am aware of the original definition where its all about well fare. The communism I refer to is more like Chinese communism, where you get put in jail for your freedom of speech, like Liu Xiaobo.



That is totalitarianism not communism. You can't just throw words around to suite your needs especially when it doesn't mean what you are trying to say.

Hell China itself isn't anything close to Communism either anymore.  It may even be nearly as capitalistic as the US.


----------



## PerveeSage (Dec 3, 2010)

I did not say it because it just suited my needs, I said it because my definition is the more publicly known definition, even if it is wrong. 

If it makes you guys happy, then fine, I meant totalitarianism.


----------



## abcd (Dec 3, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> "Arrest"
> "Trial"
> "Jury of peers"
> Ring bells?


Then guantanamo should not eist ... but it does .....


----------



## Draffut (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> Not enough time for me to prove it. I am too busy fighting off a crumbling economy, rampant employment rate and hyper inflated dollar. Oh, and there is a drug war going on at a border less than a hundred miles from where I live. I have about as much time as it takes for me to finish my coffee and breakfast while I read articles on the net.
> 
> Anyways, paying attention to news like I do, not only does the circumstantial evidence make itself clear, but there is no lack of direct pressure from the US government. The government may not have pulled the pin, but it provided the grenade.



In other words, he has no evidence or proof, and he's just talking out his rectum.


----------



## Nodonn (Dec 3, 2010)

Raiden said:


> We don't have a right to complain about a move that has caused political instability, that adds to a list of problems for our already struggling president?
> 
> While I am not completely against what Assange has done, he is wrong. He risked global political stability by releasing all those documents.



Perhaps the problem is not, you know, that someone told the police you stabbed a hobo.
Instead it might be the fact that you stabbed that hobo in the first place.


----------



## PerveeSage (Dec 3, 2010)

Oh there is plenty of proof, I just don't have time to go back and pull up the truth for people who should be looking for it on their own time.


----------



## Draffut (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> Oh there is plenty of proof, I just don't have time to go back and pull up the truth for people who should be looking for it on their own time.



Sorry, but the burdon of proof is on you, not my spare time.  Until you provide it, you are just blowing hot air.


----------



## Blue (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> Then guantanamo should not eist ... but it does .....



OH NO WHAT A RESPONSE
I am defeated
in this thread
._.

Except he's being tried in Sweden so your argument is invalid and so's your face.


----------



## Circe (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> What do you expect you put a Muslim in the White House who is doing everything possible along with his puppets in Congress to destroy this country... Hello Hello dead anyone else escape The Matrix or are you still asleep at the wheel. If you want real change if you want this country back if you want a future Barak Obama & his VP must not be re-elected...
> 
> Nuff Said'


 **


----------



## |)/-\\/\/|\| (Dec 3, 2010)

Keile said:


> The people of the Earth have no enshrined RIGHT to know anything with regards to classified US documents.
> 
> One can make the argument that Americans have a right to question US secrecy, but non-Americans do not.
> 
> ...



So non-Americans have no rights as humans? They can be lied to, abused, beaten the shit out, and they have no right to know or question? Maybe your statements about non-Americans would have made a tiny bit of sense if the U.S. government only dealt with Americans.

If atrocities happened before or are happening somewhere on earth does it make it OK if we do it?

Hearing someone talking about the right to hide his/her crimes is somehow ... actually hearing that makes you reconsider arguing with him/her.


----------



## superattackpea (Dec 3, 2010)

abcd said:


> Well the reason why I compared this to china was because IT was criticised a lot for blocking news during the whole tibet freedom riots , To maintain peace and to prevent further riots -- Well it was considered bad but US did use it to its leverage (just like it used the tianamenn massacre).
> 
> When Wikileaks screwed the other countries governments exposing their frauds IT was given awards.... But when it does the exact same thing to US ... ie to expose its secrets it becomes evil??



That has NOTHING to do with communism, communism is a form of economy. This is the same kind of irrational fear mongering that perpetuated the red scare.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

The U.S. Government couldn't even find Osama Bin Ladin & Yet low & Behold they can manage to shut down an Internet site spoiling state secrets like crazy. Western Progress I think not more like degeneration as the west has been degenerating for years now into mindless puppets for corporations.


----------



## Raiden (Dec 3, 2010)

"Can't even find Obama bin Laden?"

Easier said that done. Top US officials strongly believe he is being hidden well in Pakistan.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

FOX news suggests that Bin Laden is really "Hidden in Bill Clintons Ass."


----------



## Raiden (Dec 3, 2010)

I don't think Bill Clinton is into that kind to stuff .


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Dec 3, 2010)

Space time vortex technology and the ability to shrink criminals and hide them in peoples bodies has been revealed on the Iphone. Its true its true people who listen to politiciens are maroons.


----------



## Final Giku Tenshou (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> Space time vortex technology and the ability to shrink criminals and hide them in peoples bodies has been revealed on the Iphone. Its true its true people who listen to politiciens are maroons.



I'm sorry, but your head seems to be placed up your ass, because I sure as hell didn't understand the garbled jargon that came from your typing right there, but for the hell of it I'm going to attempt to translate it for myself.

"Space time vortex technology and the ability to shrink criminals and hide them in people's bodies has been revealed on the iPhone. It's true, people who listen to Politicians are morons."

No wait.. I still don't quite understand that, because I for one have not found this kind of technology yet.

Brb going to search application store real quick.


----------



## Talon. (Dec 3, 2010)

PerveeSage said:


> And so, communist America begins.



now hold on, jus' cuz Stalin had censorship doesn't mean anythi-


nevermind.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

THey  took a text in poll here asking do you think wiki-leaks is a terrorist organization.

68% said yes.


----------



## Deamiel (Dec 3, 2010)

Meh.  If you attempt to act with impunity, don't cry when it comes to bite you in the ass.

Now, I'm not saying that all of these documents should have been released, but countries being shown in a dark light for what they did have no reason to complain.


----------



## Raiden (Dec 3, 2010)

Hellrasinbrasin said:


> Space time vortex technology and the ability to shrink criminals and hide them in peoples bodies has been revealed on the Iphone. Its true its true people who listen to politiciens are maroons.



Is the app for that free?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Deamiel said:


> Meh.  If you attempt to act with impunity, don't cry when it comes to bite you in the ass.
> 
> Now, I'm not saying that all of these documents should have been released, but countries being shown in a dark light for what they did have no reason to complain.


And groups who fancy themselves as spy networks shouldn't be bitching when they get a taste of what a spy network should expect. 

It works both ways, and better than that still is the fact that if they were wanting to reveal the truth they should have done it all at once and not bragged about what they had. 

Serves them right.


----------



## Outlandish (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> THey  took a text in poll here asking do you think wiki-leaks is a terrorist organization.
> 
> 68% said yes.



Shows how dumb your population has become, when It's against Islam it's okay, when it's against christians it's okay but when it's against Americas illegal activities it's not okay! 

Good thing they're here to stay!


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Outlandish said:


> Shows how dumb your population has become, when It's against Islam it's okay, when it's against christians it's okay but when it's against Americas illegal activities it's not okay!
> 
> Good thing they're here to stay!


I like how you deem people stupid for simply disagreeing with you and your reasoning...that they're stupid BECAUSE they disagree. 

That kind of paints your opinion in a bad light.

*France has just banned the site *


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

And the U.S. government didn't even do that here, despite its and many citizens' contempt for the site...curious. What was all that about America becoming a less free society (based on this incident at least)?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> And the U.S. government didn't even do that here, despite its and many citizens' contempt for the site...curious. What was all that about America becoming a less free society (based on this incident at least)?


People are just talking out of their asses right and left. The attacks weren't anything government like and could have easily been another group or something. But blame the US as is the case with most things.


----------



## Outlandish (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I like how you deem people stupid for simply disagreeing with you and your reasoning...that they're stupid BECAUSE they disagree.
> 
> That kind of paints your opinion in a bad light.
> 
> *France has just banned the site *



you deem everyone that disagrees with you an idoit  

calling a whistle-blower organization a bunch of terrorists ? please tell me how that is NOT stupid! 

I could care less what you think about my opinion, nice to see you butt hurt over your shitty country that's run by banks and corporations.


----------



## Garfield (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> And groups who fancy themselves as spy networks shouldn't be bitching when they get a taste of what a spy network should expect.
> 
> It works both ways, and better than that still is the fact that if they were wanting to reveal the truth they should have done it all at once and not bragged about what they had.
> 
> Serves them right.


That sounds funnily like "If you're gonna do the right thing, do it absolutely right or not at all"


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Outlandish said:


> you deem everyone that disagrees with you an idoit
> 
> calling a whistle-blower organization a bunch of terrorists ? please tell me how that is NOT stupid!
> 
> I could care less what you think about my opinion, nice to see you butt hurt over your shitty country that's run by banks and corporations.



No I give reasons, you only reason was that they're against America and you agree with them, therefore anyone else is an idiot. That's not enough of an argument to hold up against anyone, try again. 

I like how you seem to think I'm butthurt, all of the crying in this thread and the fact that my country unlike many others isn't run by a stupid religion that would have non-believers and women be second class citizens. 

As I said before, I knew most of the facts released in these leaks, why would I give a flying fuck? 



adee said:


> That sounds funnily like "If you're gonna do the right thing, do it absolutely right or not at all"


Not exactly, its just that if you're supposed to be a whistle blower and not trying to hype shit up, you hide what you have until you sift through it for release. If they had done that and gone all out at once then it wouldn't have mattered what happened to the site. 

Even though its back up now its being shut down in other places and the leader is on the run from the law (something that innocent people typically don't do)


----------



## Razgriez (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> THey  took a text in poll here asking do you think wiki-leaks is a terrorist organization.
> 
> 68% said yes.



We got some faithful people cause Im sure there was a 3rd option that didnt label them as a terrorist but didnt like the regardless.

I wouldnt say they are a terrorist organization since they dont carry out acts of terrorism. They are however definitely conducting espionage with the full intention of damaging the US's reputation the best they possibly can with as much information they can obtain regardless of how irrelevant it is. They should of been more selective and picked up better more solid intel on us where we are really committing atrocities on a massive scale. Not what we think of the French Prime Minister.


----------



## Mider T (Dec 3, 2010)

Wikileaks should have seen this coming.  Had they just not posted so many Afghan War documents back to back they would still be around.  Poking a sleeping giant, they were.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> We got some faithful people cause Im sure there was a 3rd option that didnt label them as a terrorist but didnt like the regardless.
> 
> I wouldnt say they are a terrorist organization since they dont carry out acts of terrorism. They are however definitely conducting espionage with the full intention of damaging the US's reputation the best they possibly can with as much information they can obtain regardless of how irrelevant it is. They should of been more selective and picked up better more solid intel on us where we are really committing atrocities on a massive scale. Not what we think of the French Prime Minister.



The number leveled out to 50 something 40 something by the end of the poll. 

But this one was local and it was just two options. CWNews is like that.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 3, 2010)

Outlandish said:


> I could care less what you think about my opinion, nice to see you butt hurt over your shitty country that's run by banks and corporations.



I probably shouldn't generalize but it just seems to me that these types of responses are very indicative of the mindset and motivation behind Assange and those that support him and his site. From my POV, it just seems like an attempt at "HA TAKE THAT USA!" from him and those like-minded more than anything. Especially more than the crap Assange tries to preach about what he and Wikileaks supposedly stand for.


----------



## Razgriez (Dec 3, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> The number leveled out to 50 something 40 something by the end of the poll.
> 
> But this one was local and it was just two options. CWNews is like that.



So it was in Texas. That would be the reason why more then 50% thinks they are terrorists.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I probably shouldn't generalize but it just seems to me that these types of responses are very indicative of the mindset and motivation behind Assange and those that support him and his site. From my POV, it just seems like a "HA TAKE THAT USA!" from him and those like-minded more than anything.


I like how he calls the country shitty and acts as if that's going to set me off. I grew up in a house where two adults owned five cars. Trust me, the country from my perspective might not be perfect, but then again nothing is.



Razgriez said:


> So it was in Texas. That would be the reason why more then 50% thinks they are terrorists.



Houston is pretty liberal and the poll was text in only, which usually excludes older people. Remember, Gay Mayor, Democrat and black mayor before that. The only way you get more liberal...is being in Austin.


----------



## Descent of the Lion (Dec 3, 2010)

They should call America "The Land of the Free except. . ."

That load about the US being a free country is a crock everyone from outside the States. Don't come here believing that crap for one minute. 

BTW your countries aren't free either. 

Now excuse me, I have an underwater city to sell to the American people.


----------



## abcd (Dec 4, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> OH NO WHAT A RESPONSE
> I am defeated
> in this thread
> ._.
> ...



I love how u keep attacking the people more than the argument itself...

U talk about ideal stances like juries and peers when he has Interpol behind him for a rape case ..... I wonder how many rapists have made that list. I also gave an exception for the country u are supporting in the thread.



> Opinion: *WikiLeaks serves the global community by keeping governments in check*
> 
> Nihilist and criminal labels aside, WikiLeaks has done a lot of good. In 2007, WikiLeaks published the Kroll Report, a secret report detailing extensive government corruption by the richest man in Kenya, Daniel arap Moi. The news came out shortly before the Kenyan national election and received intense airtime on Kenyan TV. According to a Kenyan intelligence report, the leak shifted the vote by 10 percent, changing the result of the election.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 4, 2010)

A nameless NATO Official said that? Meanwhile several others, including the non-Government run New York Times said the opposite.


----------



## hcheng02 (Dec 4, 2010)

I found a very good argument about the problem of Wikileaks from the Economist here. 





> Julian Assange’s anti-political politics
> 
> Nov 30th 2010, 18:28 by D.L. | PHILADELPHIA
> 
> ...







> *At this point, what WikiLeaks is doing seems like tattling: *telling Sally what Billy said to Jane. It's sometimes possible that Sally really ought to know what Billy said to Jane, if Billy were engaged in some morally culpable deception. *But in general, we frown on gossips. If there's something particularly damning in the diplomatic cables WikiLeaks has gotten a hold of, the organisation should bring together a board of experienced people with different perspectives to review the merits of releasing that particular cable. But simply grabbing as many diplomatic cables as you can get your hands on and making them public is not a socially worthy activity.*


----------



## abcd (Dec 4, 2010)

> The New York Times, along with four European newspapers, began publishing articles related to WikiLeaks' latest trove of classified documents on Sunday afternoon. Following previous leaks on Iraq and Afghanistan, the most recent cache includes 250,000 State Department cables that provide an unprecedented look inside U.S. foreign policy.
> 
> WikiLeaks, an online whistleblower site founded by Australian computer hacker Julian Assange,* has been successful this year coordinating in advance with major news organizations rather than simply posting hundreds of thousands of documents online and out of context.* It's a media strategy aimed at achieving maximum impact for their secret material, with the New York Times, Guardian (U.K.), and Der Spiegel (Germany) all having taken advance looks at the previous Iraq and Afghanistan war logs. For this leak, Le Monde (France) and El Pais (Spain) also pored through the documents in advance.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20101128/ts_yblog_thecutline/nyt-worked-several-weeks-on-leaked-cables-wikileaks-wasnt-direct-source-for-docs


----------



## Blue (Dec 4, 2010)

> The New York Times, along with four European newspapers, began publishing articles related to WikiLeaks' latest trove of classified documents on Sunday afternoon. Following previous leaks on Iraq and Afghanistan, the most recent cache includes 250,000 State Department cables that provide an unprecedented look inside U.S. foreign policy.
> 
> WikiLeaks, an online whistleblower site founded by Australian computer hacker Julian Assange, has been successful this year coordinating in advance with major news organizations rather than simply posting hundreds of thousands of documents online and out of context. *It's a media strategy aimed at achieving maximum impact for their secret material*, with the New York Times, Guardian (U.K.), and Der Spiegel (Germany) all having taken advance looks at the previous Iraq and Afghanistan war logs. For this leak, Le Monde (France) and El Pais (Spain) also pored through the documents in advance.


Fixed that for you.

Also, improve your grammar.[/adhominem]


----------



## abcd (Dec 4, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Fixed that for you.
> 
> Also, improve your grammar.[/adhominem]



Except that was the correct response to the post I quoted. 

Also 

[YOUTUBE]9sEI1AUFJKw[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## hcheng02 (Dec 4, 2010)

abcd said:


> http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20101128/ts_yblog_thecutline/nyt-worked-several-weeks-on-leaked-cables-wikileaks-wasnt-direct-source-for-docs



First of all, this doesn't address the first part of my post. Assange is a politically naive anarchist - possibly even a nihilist - who thinks that utopia can be found by toppling any and all institutions. He also ignores the fact that some things have to be done through closed doors. The peace treaties between Egypt, Jordan, and Israel would not have been possible if the things said privately had to be towed to the official public party line of "Death to Israel!" 

Second of all, what Wikileaks did is not "bringing together a board of experienced people with different perspectives to review the merits of releasing that particular cable." Its fundamentally no different from releasing celebrity pics/gossip to the tabloids rather than simply posting on a random website so that a bigger scandal will form.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 4, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> First of all, this doesn't address the first part of my post. Assange is a politically naive anarchist - possibly even a nihilist - who thinks that utopia can be found by toppling any and all institutions. He also ignores the fact that some things have to be done through closed doors. The peace treaties between Egypt, Jordan, and Israel would not have been possible if the things said privately had to be towed to the official public party line of "Death to Israel!"
> 
> Second of all, what Wikileaks did is not "bringing together a board of experienced people with different perspectives to review the merits of releasing that particular cable." Its fundamentally no different from releasing celebrity pics/gossip to the tabloids rather than simply posting on a random website so that a bigger scandal will form.



Basically the same thing I said on the second or first page. Anarchy is stupid, naive and utterly ignorant to the facts of how the world works. 

Just another thing the people falling in line behind this asshat don't seem to get.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 4, 2010)

So I'm apparently Nazi scum now.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 4, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> So I'm apparently Nazi scum now.


Well I just found out today that all my opinions are wrong. All of them


----------



## Adonis (Dec 4, 2010)

When you want to play rebel, you have to expect backlash. Why are the institutions you are seeking to topple expected to protect you with its liberties while you do so?


----------



## Punpun (Dec 4, 2010)

Because such liberty are universal  and thus apply to everybody AND doesn't depend of USA/some country.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 4, 2010)

Uh. No. Those liberties do depend on the country. Not every country believes people have certain liberties and will not guarantee them to the people within their country or whomever is under their power. The U.S. didn't shut down or censor his site, they didn't censor him in any way. Yet people here are going on about how evil the U.S. is when there are dozens of other countries that would've had him dead a long time ago for less.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 4, 2010)

Mandom said:


> Because such liberty are universal  and thus apply to everybody AND doesn't depend of USA/some country.


That liberty doesn't protect everything all the time. The same way you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. By simply handling sensitive information and putting it out there, you're putting this country (and several others) in danger.


----------



## Punpun (Dec 4, 2010)

To your first point no, just no. Those notion are universal. Hence the existence of the Universal declaration of human right. 

As for your second  point it has nothing to do with what Adonis asked.

---

CTK, ...

Those notion that Occidental country believes in (and the rest of the world who signed two treaty/chart on the question) give all people unalienable right.

That was my answer to adonis.


----------



## Adonis (Dec 4, 2010)

Mandom said:


> Because such liberty are universal  and thus apply to everybody AND doesn't depend of USA/some country.



I wasn't arguing ethically or morally.

If we're going off the premise that these nations are corrupt and need toppling for that reason, aren't such platitudes moot? A country shouldn't be corrupt and underhanded in the first place, yet that hasn't stopped them; why would liberty being "universal" change anything?

Why perpetually be surprised that people you're chasing for not playing by the rules continue to not play by rules? 

All of this, of course, relies on whether or not you accept the premise I stated.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 4, 2010)

They are not universal, because not every country respects that declaration.


----------



## Punpun (Dec 4, 2010)

Go read it. They are universal.

If some country doesn't respect it doesn't go against its universal nature.

---

Adonis, SadlyI don't understand what you are saying. Are you sure you are speaking about the same thing than me ? 


> When you want to play rebel, you have to expect backlash. Why are the  institutions you are seeking to topple expected to protect you with its  liberties while you do so?



You were speaking about the USA right ? Well USA believes in Universal notion. Here your answer....


----------



## Sky is Over (Dec 4, 2010)

Hopefully it'll remain that way, may the sanctity of this artificial world be protected.


----------



## Adonis (Dec 4, 2010)

Mandom said:


> ---
> 
> Adonis, SadlyI don't understand what you are saying. Are you sure you are speaking about the same thing than me ?
> 
> ...



I was referring to whichever country shut down Wikileaks.

My point was, it shows a certain entitled dissonance when you're convinced the US, or whichever Democratic country you want to fling hyperbole at, are borderline tyrants yet genuinely surprised when they actually behave tyranically (i.e. censorship). 

It either shows that you're horribly naive and don't understand what happens when you poke a lion or, more likely, deep somewhere in your paranoid, boogeyman-conjuring brain your rational side knows the US, or whoever, isn't as bad as you claim it is.


----------



## UX7 (Dec 4, 2010)

The world is trying very hard to bring Assange down could could he be be the Messiah 

In all seriousness...there bunch of hypocrites here  What Assange is doing is no better than other governments of the world  Time for an example  

Governments: Start useless wars, kill innocent civilians, steal money, manipulate there own people, etc.

Assange: Releases secret information on how the above really works(which can bring chaos just like the governments do in the first place )

The only difference between the two is that governments keep secrets to themselves and other governments. Assange is now making all of it public. The funny thing about this is that the information that he is revealing now, will be release in the next 25-40 years or eventually. He is just speeding up the process

Seriously, stop with the hypocrisy(the government is always right BS)  it looks pathetic.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 4, 2010)

UX7 said:


> The world is trying very hard to bring Assange down could could he be be the Messiah
> 
> In all seriousness...there bunch of hypocrites here  What Assange is doing is no better than other governments of the world  Time for an example
> 
> ...


What makes all of what you're saying stupid is that you don't realize that secrets aren't just ambiguous MacGuffins that exist to drive some plot forward. Many of them are kept secret for the reason that they would expose countries to attacks or other things. 

By handling and publishing them he's  putting lives in danger and subverting the safety that government is meant to uphold. 

But you know, keep proclaiming your allegiance to a man so righteous that he's alluding arrest as we speak. 

My Messiah at least had the common courtesy to let himself be brought in like someone with some fucking balls.


----------



## The Weeknd (Dec 4, 2010)

World War 3 in

five
four
three
two
one....


----------



## UX7 (Dec 4, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> What makes all of what you're saying stupid is that you don't realize that secrets aren't just ambiguous MacGuffins that exist to drive some plot forward. Many of them are kept secret for the reason that they would expose countries to attacks or other things.
> 
> By putting lives in danger and subverting the safety that government is meant to uphold.
> 
> ...



So you are basically saying that the government is not putting lives in danger, but Assange is?

Right...at least have the courtesy to say that both parties have fault here. Governments for lying, manipulating, and stealing money, stating wars etc. And Assange for revealing such sensitive that could take us to WWIII. 

Talk to ya when you see both sides of the same coin.


----------



## Stalin (Dec 4, 2010)

The true messiah is sean connery.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 4, 2010)

UX7 said:


> So you are basically saying that the government is not putting lives in danger, but Assange is?
> 
> Right...at least have the courtesy to say that both parties have fault here. Governments for lying, manipulating, and stealing money, stating wars etc. And Assange for revealing such sensitive that could take us to WWIII.
> 
> Talk to ya when you see both sides of the same coin.



How can you conduct espionage if you don't lie? Sorry but you don't seem to realize that Assange seems to be trying to topple the very order that protects people without any solution to what comes next or how we will stop any of the shit that would come with the fallout. 

Governments lies, while not always good, are sometimes necessary and very good for the people they're meant to protect. 

Had the government not lied recently, several hundred people in Oregon would be dead or badly injured now...


----------



## Karsh (Dec 4, 2010)

I think everyone here in the end agrees that most people in the world are hardly experts in anything but their own individual field, if that, and that assuming everyone aren't colored by their personal experiences and by what they hear and see when making crucial, objective and diplomatic decisions and actions when it comes to people other than themselves isn't realistic.
Ah if human beings had only one thought process, there would not be one disagreement between us and all that this entails.



The Cheat said:


> The true messiah is sean connery.


----------



## Momoka (Dec 4, 2010)

OMG CENSORSHIP


----------



## Inuhanyou (Dec 4, 2010)

not surprising, everyone was after their asses


----------



## Red (Dec 4, 2010)

So I just downloaded the whole site. What are the chances that I meet an unfortunate end?


----------



## Qhorin Halfhand (Dec 4, 2010)

Red said:


> So I just downloaded the whole site. What are the chances that I meet an unfortunate end?



How can you do that?

Download the site that is, not how can you meet an unfortunate end.


----------



## Red (Dec 4, 2010)

Narutofann12 said:


> How can you do that?
> 
> Download the site that is, not how can you meet an unfortunate end.



scroll down to the bottom.

Also if me or Narutofan12 stop posting for no reason, assume we were "taken care of".


----------



## Zaru (Dec 4, 2010)

I wouldn't have sex with any swedes for the next months if I were you, red.


----------



## ximkoyra (Dec 4, 2010)

Zaru said:


> I wouldn't have sex with any swedes for the next months if I were you, red.



Nah, just make sure your condom doesn't break somehow.  Otherwise:



> We know that ... *the offence is one of 'sex by surprise'*, which is not an offence known in England



http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B14HN20101202

:ho


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 5, 2010)

Adonis said:


> I was referring to whichever country shut down Wikileaks.
> 
> My point was, it shows a certain entitled dissonance when you're convinced the US, or whichever Democratic country you want to fling hyperbole at, are borderline tyrants yet genuinely surprised when they actually behave tyranically (i.e. censorship).
> 
> It either shows that you're horribly naive and don't understand what happens when you poke a lion or, more likely, deep somewhere in your paranoid, boogeyman-conjuring brain your rational side knows the US, or whoever, isn't as bad as you claim it is.



The thing is, it wasn't even the U.S. government or any other one for that matter that shut the site down. Even during its run, we didn't censor it. We didn't censor Assange. It was Amazon, their provider that made that decision. All the people going on about how tyrannical the U.S. is for doing something it didn't even do is totally stupid.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 5, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> The thing is, it wasn't even the U.S. government or any other one for that matter that shut the site down. Even during its run, we didn't censor it. We didn't censor Assange. It was Amazon, their provider that made that decision. All the people going on about how tyrannical the U.S. is for doing something it didn't even do is totally stupid.


I heard that it was something to do with Amazon worrying about the hacker attacks fucking up their actual site, which is an easy thing to worry about. 

Really funny though that this video posted was talking about Amazon as a government puppet when they hosted this piece of shit for this long.


----------



## Sanity Check (Dec 5, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> The thing is, it wasn't even the U.S. government or any other one for that matter that shut the site down.




Who attacked the site with a massive DDOS (distributed denial of service) ?

Probably the government.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 5, 2010)

1mmortal 1tachi said:


> Who attacked the site with a massive DDOS (distributed denial of service) ?
> 
> Probably the government.


Probably not actually, why use something so shitty to attack with. 

Nice to know you're here to make assumptions without a shred of fucking evidence.


----------



## Razgriez (Dec 5, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Probably not actually, why use something so shitty to attack with.
> 
> Nice to know you're here to make assumptions without a shred of fucking evidence.



CTK forget it. If anything happens to wikileaks the government did it regardless if someone comes out with all the evidence and went "I did it and here is how I did it!". People would think he was hired on by the government or something along those lines.

People are just as short sighted as the people they constantly make fun of.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 5, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> CTK forget it. If anything happens to wikileaks the government did it regardless if someone comes out with all the evidence and went "I did it and here is how I did it!". People would think he was hired on by the government or something along those lines.
> 
> People are just as short sighted as the people they constantly make fun of.


Conspiracy theorists are so sure everything that happens is part of some bigger ploy that you would never believe that there could be any idiots in government with all of the massive planning they do to undertake impossible, improbable plots.


----------



## Aldrick (Dec 5, 2010)

> But you know, keep proclaiming your allegiance to a man so righteous that he's alluding arrest as we speak.



Because someone being wanted always means they are in the wrong.

strawmanned yo

by me that is


----------



## Gino (Dec 5, 2010)

0Fear said:


> They should call America "The Land of the Free except. . ."
> 
> That load about the US being a free country is a crock everyone from outside the States. Don't come here believing that crap for one minute.
> 
> ...



We have a winner *lol* *The world*..


----------



## impersonal (Dec 5, 2010)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> How can you conduct espionage if you don't lie? Sorry but you don't seem to realize that Assange seems to be trying to topple the very order that protects people without any solution to what comes next or how we will stop any of the shit that would come with the fallout.
> 
> Governments lies, while not always good, are sometimes necessary and very good for the people they're meant to protect.
> 
> Had the government not lied recently, several hundred people in Oregon would be dead or badly injured now...



The funny thing here is that you consider espionage a positive thing. Well true, as long as the US are spying, it's good for _them_ (bad for whoever is being spied on). The rest of the world could do just fine without being spied on by the US, though.

Assange, for the record, is not American. If Americans could understand that not all of the world has pledged allegiance to their country, then maybe they would stop screaming "treason" when it's not applicable.

Anyway, I don't believe that this leak has put anyone's life in danger, or made WWIII any more likely (what the hell are people smoking?). I don't see what the problem is. I think most of those who attack Assange are just too happy to do what the Gov tells them to.


----------



## Aldrick (Dec 5, 2010)

> How can you conduct espionage if you don't lie? Sorry but you don't seem to realize that Assange seems to be trying to topple t*he very order that protects people* without any solution to what comes next or how we will stop any of the shit that would come with the fallout.



I don't

hmmm

bleurgh


----------



## Rikudou (Dec 5, 2010)

Shame! Shame!!!


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Dec 5, 2010)

Wikileaks attracted my interest since Hadopi could be the result of US pressure on french government. I was already aware about the like between the american music and movie industries with Washington and their activities in places like South America or South Korea but i wasn't so aware about it in Europe.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 5, 2010)

impersonal said:


> The funny thing here is that you consider espionage a positive thing. Well true, as long as the US are spying, it's good for _them_ (bad for whoever is being spied on). The rest of the world could do just fine without being spied on by the US, though.



From this statement I can only assume you're very naive. Every first world nation conducts some level of espionage. I would no more expect any other country to stop than I would us. But you know you're so good at inventing stupid fucking arguments to try and fight against that you shouldn't let a little thing like reality stop you. 



> Assange, for the record, is not American. If Americans could understand that not all of the world has pledged allegiance to their country, then maybe they would stop screaming "treason" when it's not applicable.



Treason is applicable to the people who were American and gave him the secrets, perhaps that's what people mean? 

Yeah that would make some sense and it would make what you're saying here null. 



> Anyway, I don't believe that this leak has put anyone's life in danger, or made WWIII any more likely (what the hell are people smoking?). I don't see what the problem is. I think most of those who attack Assange are just too happy to do what the Gov tells them to.



Go on and tell yourself that, everyone who doesn't like Assange is in one group all together and you can just paint them with the same brush. 

If you haven't noticed, this isn't a thread about one leak, this is about wikileaks supporters whining and blaming the US for something that there really isn't any proof that they did.


----------

