please post you social security number, bank account info and anything else usefulContinue to make the case for censorship if you will, but when that comes back to bite you I'll expect you to shut up and take it.
please post you social security number, bank account info and anything else usefulContinue to make the case for censorship if you will, but when that comes back to bite you I'll expect you to shut up and take it.
You got it backwards. Red > blue.If your cum is red.
Please. Go se a doctor.
Now. If it's Blue.
That would be cool.
Relevance? When was the Vietnam War again?Your ****ed now.
"The My Lai Massacre (Vietnamese: thảm sát Mỹ Lai [mǐˀ lɐːj]; English pronunciation: /ˌmi:ˈleɪ, ˌmi:ˈlaɪ/ ( listen),[1] Vietnamese: [mǐˀlaːj]) was the mass murder conducted by a unit of the U.S. Army on March 16, 1968 of 347–504 unarmed citizens in South Vietnam, all of whom were civilians and a majority of whom were women, children (including babies) and elderly people."
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre
Ah, there it is, the idiotic notion that Assange is somehow acting with nobility. To bad you are so wrong. Assange is posting this stuff because he has this extreme anti-US sentiment. It has nothing to do with righting any wrongs, perceived, real or otherwise.So while this is not a good move from a self-preservation standpoint, it sets the precedent that men who believe in something can tell the world their side of the story. This is more noble than following any law, and if it comes at the price of being labeled a criminal then so be it.
Censorship? Again, no person has a legal or moral right or freedom to publish that which they do not have permission to publish. You are just as ****ed in the head as Assange if you subscribe to the bull**** you just said.Continue to make the case for censorship if you will, but when that comes back to bite you I'll expect you to shut up and take it.
Don't worry, if he doesn't post his SS#, bank info as I requested, we'll know who the true censorship nazi isCensorship? Again, no person has a legal or moral right or freedom to publish that which they do not have permission to publish. You are just as ****ed in the head as Assange if you subscribe to the bull**** you just said.
Ah, there it is, the idiotic notion that Assange is somehow acting with nobility.
Again, no person has a legal or moral right or freedom to publish that which they do not have permission to publish. You are just as ****ed in the head as Assange if you subscribe to the bull**** you just said.
The person who leaked the documents committed a crime, the person or organisation that published them, i.e. Wikileaks, has not committed a crime. At least do a tiny bit of research before posting.Censorship? Again, no person has a legal or moral right or freedom to publish that which they do not have permission to publish. You are just as ****ed in the head as Assange if you subscribe to the bull**** you just said.
oh jesus.
were you born yesterday?
now I can't speak for all "American people," but I can tell you why I personally didn't get my panties in a bunch over the leaked attack helicopter footage. and that's because I live in the real world. I don't pretend that life is perfect or fair or just.
did you even watch the video?
if so, did you have your sound on?
the footage clearly shows the US engaging a group of men only after it was reported that the targets were hostile. they didn't just open fire on them because they were bored and looking for some action. the helicopter circles the area for a long time, all the while discussing with ground troops in the area the possibility that the targets were friendly. field reports indicated that the men may have been carrying weapons and the quality of the on-board video from the chopper makes it difficult to discern otherwise.
the order to lay down fire was not given until after it was determined that one of the men may have been carrying an RPG, another an RPK, and another some kind of long rifle. yeah, it's hard to tell. but assuming that to be the case, the helicopter crew did its job by engaging a potential threat in order to secure the area for nearby ground units.
turns out they weren't hostile.
turns out they weren't carrying any weapons. just cameras and tripods.
you know what?
oh well.
sh*t happens. this is war.
war is not neat and orderly like Stratego.
war is fast, chaotic, uncertain and most definitely unfair.
the reason that people were not more shocked by this footage is because they understand the burden of warfare. decisions are made and carried out with little hesitation. yes, mistakes will sometimes be made, but maintaining the chain of command is imperative. this is just another in a long line of unfortunate circumstances due to the nature of modern warfare. it sucks, but you can't be surprised by it. you can't act like it's some huge deal that we should all cry about.
you know, a hundred years ago this would not have happened because those douche bags wouldn't even be there. the reporters I mean. yes, those reporters were douche bags. and so is every other journalist walking around in the middle of the fight.
they went to a war zone. they knew the risks.
what did they expect?
they wanted their merit badge. they wanted to take a bunch of shocking war photographs to improve their portfolio and boost their resume.
oh goody, just what we needed, more pictures of a war-torn and bullet-ridden sand village. gimme a break, we know what the sh*t looks like. we don't need a bunch of assholes wandering around snapping photos making it more difficult for the allies to distinguish between friend and foe.
can't stand the heat?
get your ass out the kitchen....
No, I'm declaring that freedom of information is worth fighting for. Even if it is "anti-US" (let me guess which country you live in). I don't care if WikiLeaks publishes a document "proving" that the Holocaust never happened. Let them speak, or when Holocaust Part 2 finds you in its cross-hairs you'll rethink the position that individuals can't spread information without permission from a government.
It has nothing to do with whether I personally find Wikileaks or yourself to be "right" or "wrong"; it is about the law. If the media resorts to operating outside the law to push this information, it is either for the reason that the media is ineffective or, those who do this have an agenda that has nothing to do with freedom of information. Seems to me Assange fits in the latter rather than the former.Your argument is that I agree with someone you dislike therefore I'm wrong? Everyone has the right to publish anything. Who has the right to tell them otherwise?
You think I do not know that the leaker has broken the law? That fact in no way absolves Wikileaks from its responsibility to abide by the law. There do exist legal methods of obtaining information from the State Department. Taking possession of stolen information is not one of them.The person who leaked the documents committed a crime, the person or organisation that published them, i.e. Wikileaks, has not committed a crime. At least do a tiny bit of research before posting.
Just google pentagon papers. Wikileaks in no way is breaking the U.S. law by releasing the cables. I don't know about other countries but it's probably the same case.You think I do not know that the leaker has broken the law? That fact in no way absolves Wikileaks from its responsibility to abide by the law. There do exist legal methods of obtaining information from the State Department. Taking possession of stolen information is not one of them.
Again, if this was blowing the whistle on illegal activities covered up by making these documents classified, it would relate directly to your Pentagon Papers case. But, this guy is releasing sensitive documents in an effort to embarrass the US and other countries. It isn't about highlighting illegal activities. To top that off, Assange claims that he has in his possession, and will publish, operational information that would be damaging to the US' abilities to protect its vital interests. And that, my friend, is called espionage and means Assange is a criminal if he publishes what he claims to have.Just google pentagon papers. Wikileaks in no way is breaking the U.S. law by releasing the cables. I don't know about other countries but it's probably the same case.