Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 12:38 PM       
Quote:
I like how you make it sound like I support the policies of the Swedish government, or am somehow responsible for it...
With all of your precious transparency in Sweden shouldn't your government be beyond simple mistakes like this?
seriously doesn't swden have like one of the highest transparencies in the world and yet they are the one violating this dudes rights

__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Tadao Tadao is offline
☆☆☆☆☆
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 01:36 PM       
I've written Blasted Child off as a political lummox months ago. When he's cornered he either doesn't reply at all or he tries the old OK YOU GOT ME YOU'RE SO SMART sarcasm routine. On top of it, if he does something like attack someone elses country with generalized stereotypes and it gets thrown back at him, he starts in with the same old tired line of WOW YOU SURE DO STUDY UP ON ME A LOT, YOU MUST REALLY WANT TO BE ME. It's the same routine every time and as predictable as a rock being dropped in a puddle of water.

It's funny to watch him butt into a conversation though when no one is even talking to him. HEY GUYS, THIS IS THE PERFECT PLACE FOR ME TO SAY MY LINE!
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Tadao Tadao is offline
☆☆☆☆☆
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 01:38 PM       
Oh god, I just read what he wrote. He thinks he's pushing my buttons.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Blasted Child Blasted Child is offline
Lethal fresco
Blasted Child's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 01:53 PM       
When exactly have you got me cornered, Tadao?

Also, I'm not sure the phrase "studied up" applies in your case...

But why don't you make a search through your own post history and look up where you've written stuff about "sweden", "swedish" or "swedes", and tell me if it doesn't come across as just a tad obsessive. Especially since most of those posts are not preceded by america-criticism on my part
__________________
I dream of houses
Reply With Quote
  #205  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 02:01 PM       
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #206  
The Leader The Leader is offline
Is a RoboCop.
The Leader's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: How do you like these apples, Chojin?
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 02:06 PM       
Blasted Child doesn't know how to not be a serious sally.
__________________
JUST DANCE!
Reply With Quote
  #207  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 02:11 PM       
lol sally

Quote:
just a tad obsessive.
IntERESTING HOW YOU CALL HIM OBSESSIve AND YET

A TAD O TADAO WHATS THIS YOU THINK ABOUT HIM SUBCONSCIOUSLY
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Tadao Tadao is offline
☆☆☆☆☆
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 03:50 PM       
Because I know 2 things about Sweden

1: They are pussies when it comes to politics
2: If it wasn't for San Francisco, they would be the kings of self righteousness

I'm obsessive. In fact, you seem to know 10 times more about America than I know about Sweden. I guess that makes you a jealous stalker.
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Tadao Tadao is offline
☆☆☆☆☆
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 04:10 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasted Child View Post
When exactly have you got me cornered, Tadao?
I've already put you in a corner 3 times in this thread alone. I'm not gonna play your little Coolinator game where we go back to every point and explain where you failed because you are too fucking lame to figure it out. So instead I will give you a fresh brand new corner. I know how hard it is for you to keep up so it will be less tedious this way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasted Child View Post
Tadao, if it would make you feel better, I can play along and pretend to be extremely offended by your attacks on Sweden.

I can pretend that it hurts a lot to hear you talk about events that took place 40 years before my birth, by a government I don't support, and I can also take back everything I've said about transparency so far, because I've suddenly understood the logical connection between your endless indignant ramblings about Swedes being pussies and the dangers of governmental transparency, it just makes so much sense now!
Were have I said that there are dangers in governmental transparency?
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Zhukov Zhukov is offline
Supa Soviet Missil Mastar
Zhukov's Avatar
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tasmania
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 05:01 PM       
Ok, I support the mockery and downright abuse of people to the fullest extent. I like it when sarcasm and deceit makes stupid people mad, and causes them to look even more stupid.

It's not really funny at all if the people that you are trying to mock don't take the bait, it just makes you look a little desperate. Trying to find absolutely everyone's 'weak spot' inevitably means that you are going to encounter people that genuinely don't care if you try to make fun of them, or will just get annoyed after a few pages of nonsensical posts claiming that they have been 'backed into a corner' - is that what you are aiming for?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #211  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 05:15 PM       
zhukov kinda sounds like he's backed into a corner
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Tadao Tadao is offline
☆☆☆☆☆
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 05:22 PM       
Lol, this coming from the fact master.
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Tadao Tadao is offline
☆☆☆☆☆
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 05:30 PM       
It's as if you skim the conversations and form your own opinion on what people are saying without actually reading all the words.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Pentegarn Pentegarn is offline
Clap if you love Dynamo
Pentegarn's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a dystopian future
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 06:37 PM       
They don't want to address anything to do with cause and effect. And every time I try to explain it they both refuse to listen then flat out ignore it without addressing the points about transparency having long term bad effects. When I give an example where many many lives are lost as a result of transparency, I get a smokescreen reply saying I think "that gassing Kurds and torturing civilians should have been kept classified? Best that nobody found out?". Instead of an honest assessment of what that actually shows. Not that I should be surprised, PR guilt trips and making your opponents look like they are heartless to hide the fact that you are mindless is a tried and true communist debate technique. If it isn't Zhukov attacking how kind you look to others, it is Blasted Child not posting a single thought or addressing a single point in dozens of posts. Unless you count drawings that a kindergartner would be ashamed to cop to as 'addressing points'

Meanwhile we are also asked, when did Assange directly do hacking or theft of government documents? I will address this once again. Possessing stolen property is a crime, and is treated itself as theft in the US. We do this sort of thing so criminals in the US so they can't hide behind, "but I didn't do it directly" Charles Manson for example sits forever in jail and yet has never murdered a soul, yet his actions resulted in the deaths of many innocent people.

I find it ironic, and very hypocritical that you demand the government take responsibility for what they do, but give a pass to wikileaks because of a painfully transparent anti America agenda
Reply With Quote
  #215  
The Leader The Leader is offline
Is a RoboCop.
The Leader's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: How do you like these apples, Chojin?
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 06:56 PM       
you're retarded
__________________
JUST DANCE!
Reply With Quote
  #217  
The Leader The Leader is offline
Is a RoboCop.
The Leader's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: How do you like these apples, Chojin?
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 07:16 PM       
true
__________________
JUST DANCE!
Reply With Quote
  #218  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 08:05 PM       
i like how his points could be easily refuted with like three carefuly placed sentences that will never come
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #219  
MLE MLE is offline
CHIEF OF POLICE
MLE's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Nice Chinese Restaurant
Old Dec 21st, 2010, 10:43 PM       
I'm just popping in to say that all of these arguments/discussions/debates are going nowhere and have gone nowhere. I've gotten bored of reading it, so I'm just gonna stop.

Yeah, that's about it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Zhukov Zhukov is offline
Supa Soviet Missil Mastar
Zhukov's Avatar
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tasmania
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 05:05 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pentegarn View Post
They don't want to address anything to do with cause and effect. And every time I try to explain it they both refuse to listen then flat out ignore it without addressing the points about transparency having long term bad effects. When I give an example where many many lives are lost as a result of transparency, I get a smokescreen reply saying I think "that gassing Kurds and torturing civilians should have been kept classified? Best that nobody found out?".
You haven't tried to explain it, you've just told us that we are naive for not realising it. How will government transparency lead to the collapse of American society and widespread chaos? What are the long term bad effects of having a government answer to its citizens? Oh, and that final sentence in the quote there isn't a statement on what you think, it's a question that you didn't answer.

So, where is your proof that Julian Assange or Wikileaks are hacking into and stealing US military secrets?

What are the sensitive military secrets that Wikileaks has stolen, and why are they so dangerous if people know about them?

How does Wikileaks encourage other people to hack and steal information for them?


Quote:
Instead of an honest assessment of what that actually shows. Not that I should be surprised, PR guilt trips and making your opponents look like they are heartless to hide the fact that you are mindless is a tried and true communist debate technique.
What? That is retarded. Please, please, I beg you, since it sounds like there are NUMEROUS examples, could you please provide an example of a communist PR guilt trip designed to hide mindlessness? Not that this has nothing to do with anything, and you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel if all you've got are 'typical communist debate technique' insults, but inquiring minds would like to know.


Quote:
If it isn't Zhukov attacking how kind you look to others,
What? I am attacking... how ... how kind you look? What does that mean?

Quote:
it is Blasted Child not posting a single thought or addressing a single point in dozens of posts. Unless you count drawings that a kindergartner would be ashamed to cop to as 'addressing points'
I found them funny. You are not addressing points that have been raised, so I don't think you should expect people to not just stop being serious and make fun of your inane arguments.

Quote:
Meanwhile we are also asked, when did Assange directly do hacking or theft of government documents? I will address this once again....
This is the first time...

Quote:
...Possessing stolen property is a crime, and is treated itself as theft in the US.
So he didn't hack into government military files and steal information then. So he is not the hacker thief you claimed he was. The possession of stolen goods might be a crime - I'm not down with legal issues surrounding stolen words - but the information leaked to wikileaks was not stolen, and not even the US government, as far as I am aware, are claiming that it was. Where are you getting your information that says it was stolen?

Quote:
I find it ironic, and very hypocritical that you demand the government take responsibility for what they do, but give a pass to wikileaks because of a painfully transparent anti America agenda
You haven't proven an anti American agenda; you have no idea what wikileaks has actually leaked via their website, since it's hundreds of documents from all over the globe - a lot of which have American sources because they are leaked by American diplomats or some such. What makes you think it is an anti American agenda? Also, as I have already said before, I am not giving wikileaks a pass from responsibility - I think they DO have responsibility - that's why I admire Julian Assange and Wikileaks, it's just that you think they personally hacked and stole the information and should be responsible for theft.

They didn't steal anything - it was leaked to them from others that had that information given to them. You have no proof that anything was stolen.

Quote:
I'm just popping in to say that all of these arguments/discussions/debates are going nowhere and have gone nowhere. I've gotten bored of reading it, so I'm just gonna stop.
No, they're not going anywhere anymore. True enough.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #221  
Blasted Child Blasted Child is offline
Lethal fresco
Blasted Child's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 07:11 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadao View Post
I've already put you in a corner 3 times in this thread alone. I'm not gonna play your little Coolinator game where we go back to every point and explain where you failed because you are too fucking lame to figure it out. So instead I will give you a fresh brand new corner. I know how hard it is for you to keep up so it will be less tedious this way.
I think you're overestimating your ability to put people in corners, Tadao. At least when it comes to verbal arguments. I don't know about cornering people physically, but something tells me you do that much better.

I've looked through the posts you've made here (and god it's not a pretty sight), and the only time you've demanded some sort of response is when you asked for names of the leaks. I gave you a name that time, the most prominent leak so far. Link and all.
Then you kept repeating this request, as if I personally wrote the damned wikileaks and kept all the contacts in some sort of folder. Is that when you cornered me, Tadao? When you kept shouting "I want names!!"?

Oh, let me guess, it's when you wrote "what are you gonna do with all this information?" Then sorry if I didn't reply. This is what transparency is, Tadao, when people get information. What do you do with the news you read? Do you always do something actively?
Well some people do. And then you can support them, when you've received information and know how to cast your vote.
I simply think people should get information. I think that's ultimately a good thing. Totalitarian regimes cover up things and keep their people in the dark. You don't want that.

This is really all I have to say about this. It has nothing to do with being anti-american; if I was anti-american I would think you deserved the same kind of non-transparency they have in China.

Just my two cents.
__________________
I dream of houses
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Pentegarn Pentegarn is offline
Clap if you love Dynamo
Pentegarn's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a dystopian future
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 07:32 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post
You haven't tried to explain it, you've just told us that we are naive for not realising it. How will government transparency lead to the collapse of American society and widespread chaos? What are the long term bad effects of having a government answer to its citizens? Oh, and that final sentence in the quote there isn't a statement on what you think, it's a question that you didn't answer.

So, where is your proof that Julian Assange or Wikileaks are hacking into and stealing US military secrets?

What are the sensitive military secrets that Wikileaks has stolen, and why are they so dangerous if people know about them?

How does Wikileaks encourage other people to hack and steal information for them?



What? That is retarded. Please, please, I beg you, since it sounds like there are NUMEROUS examples, could you please provide an example of a communist PR guilt trip designed to hide mindlessness? Not that this has nothing to do with anything, and you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel if all you've got are 'typical communist debate technique' insults, but inquiring minds would like to know.




What? I am attacking... how ... how kind you look? What does that mean?

I found them funny. You are not addressing points that have been raised, so I don't think you should expect people to not just stop being serious and make fun of your inane arguments.



This is the first time...



So he didn't hack into government military files and steal information then. So he is not the hacker thief you claimed he was. The possession of stolen goods might be a crime - I'm not down with legal issues surrounding stolen words - but the information leaked to wikileaks was not stolen, and not even the US government, as far as I am aware, are claiming that it was. Where are you getting your information that says it was stolen?



You haven't proven an anti American agenda; you have no idea what wikileaks has actually leaked via their website, since it's hundreds of documents from all over the globe - a lot of which have American sources because they are leaked by American diplomats or some such. What makes you think it is an anti American agenda? Also, as I have already said before, I am not giving wikileaks a pass from responsibility - I think they DO have responsibility - that's why I admire Julian Assange and Wikileaks, it's just that you think they personally hacked and stole the information and should be responsible for theft.

They didn't steal anything - it was leaked to them from others that had that information given to them. You have no proof that anything was stolen.

No, they're not going anywhere anymore. True enough.
1) A while back I pointed to an example article from wikileaks you posted that was both stolen (as all these leaked documents are) and how it effects the military, you ignored it then, and I am not going to repeat myself because you will ignore it now

2) the reason you think BC's childishly talentless cartoon was funny is because he is the only person who has your back

3) regarding examples of your heartless to somkescreen your weak stance, I gave 2 glaring examples, and even repeated them many times (gassing kurds to counter my Iraq transparency example, and your stance that I thought the holocaust should have been hidden which you made not because you honestly believed I thought that, but to make me look heartless so you could draw attention away from my point. Well, either that, or you really were moronic enough to believe that I thought the killing of 6 million people should have been or even could have been hidden. So either I am right about you, or you are a moron)

4) Assange is a cyber terrorist, a holder of documents he knows do not belong to him (a thief if ever there was one despite your counterargument based entirely in semantics) He not only knows they are stolen, he has no qualms about threatening the US with them, has done so before, and continues to do so now. And please, don't try to say "well he is defending himself" he fired the first salvo in this little war, are you telling me the governments have no right to defend themselves?

5) I noticed you ignored my SSA point, a domestic government installation, that has the US primary information item for every US citizen that if it were transparent as you wish so hard for it to be would render hundreds of millions of people naked to identity thieves.

6) You want a break down explained. Honestly I had thought you smart enough to know what could happen long term and were just ignoring it, but since I find I was mistaken about you I will give you one scenario

-Assange releases 250000 US documents, some of which could have military secrets in them, many of which have things that aren't the worlds business, some of which were bad, but nowhere near as bad as what they prevented.

-The world, galvanized by internet outraged, appeals to the UN

-The UN creates sanctions to hurt the US financially, but all it really does is eliminate the upper middle, middle, and lower middle class rendering the country mostly poverty stricken with a 2% of the population unaffected.

-The more zealous, anti american entities of the world decide the US has yet to suffer enough, and with what they now know about the domestic security of the US multiple terrorist cells decide to all attack, lives are lost in the millions, some countries may even find a weakened America a tempting target so they could strike too, which would mean war on US soil

-The US economy collapses, this now means exports of dozens of countries shut down, this also means, that food that used to be shipped to third world countries has also ceased, so now millions of people who rely on US agriculture must starve, and millions who rely on US spending to feed their families are also ruined.

That's just one possible way it could shake out, death, war, and world hunger all to satisfy your desire for sudden total transparency. Personally, I do not think the ends justify the means in that scenario, and would rather not take the chance of it coming to pass. Also I can't help but notice (nod to Tadao for inadvertently reminding me of this) that transparency doesn't seem to stop despot leaders like Kim Jong Il or Saddam Hussein so what good will it do with countries that are not committing atrocities at the level those leaders have? Countries have had the need for secrets because petty people have made it so. You can't change human nature and trying to force it to change is a pointless and dangerous endeavor.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Zhukov Zhukov is offline
Supa Soviet Missil Mastar
Zhukov's Avatar
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tasmania
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 08:59 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pentegarn View Post
1) A while back I pointed to an example article from wikileaks you posted that was both stolen (as all these leaked documents are) and how it effects the military, you ignored it then, and I am not going to repeat myself because you will ignore it now
Thanks for telling me what page that is on, but I think I found what you are talking about:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov
CIA report into shoring up Afghan war support in Western Europe, 11 Mar 2010 - This classified CIA analysis from March, outlines possible PR-strategies to shore up public support in Germany and France for a continued war in Afghanistan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pentegarn
Looks like that is a military secret to me, it is classified, it is designed to help get support from other countries, and yet now, thanks to some espionage (exposing classified documents about strategies can be called nothing else you see) this particular strategy has been compromised. Why did the whistle need to be blown on this? To show the US uses PR to gain support from other countries? Unless you live under a rock you should know every country does this. Now that this is out there the people have gained nothing, yet the US just lost face in a PR campaign they felt was necessary.
Funnily enough, I didn't just ignore it then; here is my response:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov
Assange didn't commit espionage to obtain the information. It was given to wikileaks by most likely a member of the US military. It's not espionage, nor is 'exposing classified documents' considered espionage. The fact that such classified information is leaked through this particular website is NOT proof that said website used espionage to obtain it. That's not proof that Assange is a spy, a head of a spy ring, a hacker, or assisting or being an accessory to spies.
If you are referring to me not responding to the threat that leak poses to the military, ok. I don't consider it breaking news that the US spends money on public relations to drum up support for war, you agree with me, so why is it's revelation so dangerous? Why do people not deserve to know for sure that it happens? Why does it 'compromise' the strategy if people know that there is a strategy? I'm asking you why it's so dangerous that this information is leaked.

I also don't think you can just say that a document is stolen; you have to tell me how you know it's stolen. Saying "they are all stolen" isn't sufficient. The documents are uploaded anonymously to Wikileaks, the only person accused of ANYTHING by the US government is Bradley Manning, who didn't steal anything, but has been charged with 'unauthorized use and disclosure of U.S. classified information', so he was entrusted with information that he then passed on. No stealing.

Seriously. Nothing has been proven to be stolen. Even if there was stolen information, it doesn't change what the information says, and it doesn't change a people's right to know what their government is up to.

Quote:
2) the reason you think BC's childishly talentless cartoon was funny is because he is the only person who has your back
Nah, they were funny. It was a big see-through sheet attacking people. Haha.

Quote:
3) regarding examples of your heartless to somkescreen your weak stance, I gave 2 glaring examples, and even repeated them many times (gassing kurds to counter my Iraq transparency example, and your stance that I thought the holocaust should have been hidden which you made not because you honestly believed I thought that, but to make me look heartless so you could draw attention away from my point. Well, either that, or you really were moronic enough to believe that I thought the killing of 6 million people should have been or even could have been hidden. So either I am right about you, or you are a moron)
If you don't think the holocaust should have been kept classified, then why? Why should that have been uncovered? The government deemed it classified.

Pentegarn, your arguments led to me asking you questions based on what I considered the next step in your logic. You stated that governments should have the right to keep things classified if they deem it necessary, so I followed on and asked you if a government (Nazis) had the right to keep things (holocaust) classified that they deemed necessary. I didn't ask you if it was ok to kill 6 million Jews, I didn't ask you if you hated Jews and were a Nazi and whether or not you would commit genocide, I asked you if THAT was an exception from your statement, or if it didn't come into it at all, or whatever. I asked you what you thought and you considered it an 'ad hominem' attack. Same with Saddam; he was a government, he decided that gassing people and torturing people should be kept classified, and I asked you if he had that right and whether it should be respected. MY point is this: if a government decides what should be secret and what shouldn't, they will inevitably cover up their mistakes and crimes under the cover of 'it's classified', the numerous gaffes and crimes shown on wikileaks backs this up.

You also thought that the Watergate scandal was ok to be out in the open, but only because it was released by a respectable newspaper, and not a website. I don't see how this fits.


Quote:
4) Assange is a cyber terrorist, a holder of documents he knows do not belong to him (a thief if ever there was one despite your counterargument based entirely in semantics) He not only knows they are stolen, he has no qualms about threatening the US with them, has done so before, and continues to do so now. And please, don't try to say "well he is defending himself" he fired the first salvo in this little war, are you telling me the governments have no right to defend themselves?
Again, you are just stating he's a 'cyber terrorist' who steals or has other people steal things for him without any substance. Still, even if it was all true (which you have not proven) what difference does it make? Do people not deserve to know what their governments are up to?

Quote:
5) I noticed you ignored my SSA point, a domestic government installation, that has the US primary information item for every US citizen that if it were transparent as you wish so hard for it to be would render hundreds of millions of people naked to identity thieves.
Your social security information and other private stuff like that isn't really relevant to this discu... uh, argument. Nobody is calling for that to be 'transparent', Julian Assange is not releasing credit card numbers on Wikileaks. It's not like a society can't choose what it wants to be known as public knowledge and what should remain private. Geez. I didn't ignore you when you pointed that out, I stated that Blasted Child already addressed it by saying what I have said just then, but more thoroughly.

Quote:
6) You want a break down explained. Honestly I had thought you smart enough to know what could happen long term and were just ignoring it, but since I find I was mistaken about you I will give you one scenario

-Assange releases 250000 US documents, some of which could have military secrets in them, many of which have things that aren't the worlds business, some of which were bad, but nowhere near as bad as what they prevented.
What are these military secrets, and what does their secrecy prevent?
Quote:
-The world, galvanized by internet outraged, appeals to the UN


-The UN creates sanctions to hurt the US financially, but all it really does is eliminate the upper middle, middle, and lower middle class rendering the country mostly poverty stricken with a 2% of the population unaffected.
- Also, the UN passes a law that says every first born US citizen needs to be genetically engineered to only have one working eye. This is called 'The Mark'.

Quote:
-The more zealous, anti american entities of the world decide the US has yet to suffer enough, and with what they now know about the domestic security of the US multiple terrorist cells decide to all attack, lives are lost in the millions, some countries may even find a weakened America a tempting target so they could strike too, which would mean war on US soil
- America's common enemies enter a triad of hatred, lead by the Neo-Soviets, China and The Greater Iranian Sphere of Prosperity.

Quote:
-The US economy collapses, this now means exports of dozens of countries shut down, this also means, that food that used to be shipped to third world countries has also ceased, so now millions of people who rely on US agriculture must starve, and millions who rely on US spending to feed their families are also ruined.
-Julian Assange accends to throne of Emperor of Mankind. The 350 year war against America begins.

Quote:
That's just one possible way it could shake out, death, war, and world hunger all to satisfy your desire for sudden total transparency. Personally, I do not think the ends justify the means in that scenario, and would rather not take the chance of it coming to pass.
You're nuts. That is complete speculation and 'worst case scenario', thrown in with a little ignorance and a dash of patriotic militia well-wishing. I've got nothing to say except that. Here is my "scenario", which I think is a little more realistic:

Documents are released, people want their government to start being more honest, nothing much else happens worth mentioning in the grand scheme of things.

If there was transparency in the government then maybe, just maybe, they would stop, or cut down on, institutionalised abuse, crime, environmental destruction, and economic lies, because an angry public would protest and not allow it. Maybe.


Quote:
Also I can't help but notice (nod to Tadao for inadvertently reminding me of this) that transparency doesn't seem to stop despot leaders like Kim Jong Il or Saddam Hussein so what good will it do with countries that are not committing atrocities at the level those leaders have? Countries have had the need for secrets because petty people have made it so. You can't change human nature and trying to force it to change is a pointless and dangerous endeavor.
Seriously, don't drag the fallacy of 'human nature' into this otherwise ... ok, it's idiotic already, just don't make it worse. YOU CAN'T CHANGE HUMAN NATURE WE ARE HARD WIRED TO GREED. Anyway, I think you will find that the people of North Korea by and large believe that their beloved leader is a god, a benevolent ruler of a utopia surrounded by post apocalyptic hell holes infested with Ameri-Demons. Kim Jong-Il and Sadaam are hardly the poster boys of an honest government; their citizens didn't know what they were up to. If you want to know why 'The World' doesn't fix the problems in North Korea, even though it knowns about them, it's because it doesn't give a shit about the people, and only cares about the status quo. This is also why your scenario of unadulterated fiction would not happen; the UN would not place sanctions on the USA.


/end typical communist debate techniques.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #224  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 10:20 AM       
ALRIGHT I DIDNT READ MOST OF THIS PAGE BUT HERES WHAT IM RESPONDING TO:

Quote:
I'm not down with legal issues surrounding stolen words - but the information leaked to wikileaks was not stolen, and not even the US government, as far as I am aware, are claiming that it was.
IT WAS STOLEN BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THEY HAD ACCESS TO THE INFORMATION IT DOESNT MEAN THAT THEY CAN JUST SELL IT OR GIVE IT AWAY. HERES SOME eXAMPleS:

SO YOUR BOSS GIVES YOU A COMPANY CAR TO DRIVe AROUND. OH I GUESS THAT CARS YOURS NOW SO YOU CAN GO SELL IT TO A USED CAR DEALERSHIP RIGHT?
NOPE.

OKAY SO YOU WORK AT A DESK AT WORK, RIGHT? SO THAT DESKS YOURS ISNT IT? SO WHEN YOU LEAVE YOU GET TO TAKE IT WITH YOU AND DO WHATEVER YOU WANt WITH IT RIGHT?
OH NO SORRY.

DO WE NEED ANY MORE EXAMPLES OF STUFF WHEN KNOWLEdge 'beloNgS" TO SOMEBODY BUT ITS STiLL ILLEgAL to Give it to SOMEBODY ELSE? MAYBE LIKE INSIDE TRADING? HOW BOUT THAT ONE? WOULDNT BE SURPRISED IF SOME OF THE STUFF ON WIKILEAKS SUPPORtED INSIDE TRADINg.
ALSO ISNT INSIDE TRADING JUST ANOTHER FORM OF "TRANSPARENCY?" YET ITS AGAINST THE LAW! HOW STRANge

OH HERES ANOthER GOOD ONE. YOU WORK IN A BANK AND HAVE BEEN GIVEN RESPONSIBILITY OVER SEVERAL PERSONS BANK ACCOUNTS. WELL, YOU CAN JUST GO SELL ALL OF tHAT INFORMATiON BECAUSE it WAS GIVEN TO YOU! ALSO YOU CAN WITHDRAWAL AS MUCH MONEY AS YOU LIKE! SERIOUSLY!

PSYCHOLOgiSTS ARE GIvEN INFORMATION BY thEIR PATIENTS AND Yet IF tHEY WENT AROUND GIving iT TO PEOPLE WHAT WOULD THAT BE?
A BETRAYAL OF CONFIDENTIALITy. WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW.


ARENT SOME GOVERNMENT THINGS CONFIDENTIAL AND "tOP SECRETS." SORRY But itS A CRIME TO DISCLOSE SUCH KNOWLEDGE. MILITARY PEOPLE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DISCLOSE DETAILS ABOU tHEIR GOvERNMENT. ITS CALLED SEDITION AND IS A CRIME. FUCK JUST SAYIng SOMETHINg BAD ABOUT YOUR COUntRY WHILE YOURe WeARING YOUR UNIFORM CAN GET YOU IN tROUBLE SOMEtiMES.
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #225  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 11:16 AM       
Quote:
Assange didn't commit espionage to obtain the information. It was given to wikileaks by most likely a member of the US military. It's not espionage, nor is 'exposing classified documents' considered espionage. The fact that such classified information is leaked through this particular website is NOT proof that said website used espionage to obtain it. That's not proof that Assange is a spy, a head of a spy ring, a hacker, or assisting or being an accessory to spies.
Here's a definition of ESPIONAGE that i found:
Quote:
Black's Law Dictionary (1990) defines espionage as: "...gathering, transmitting, or losing...information related to the national defense".
Sounds like he does all of that

ALSO you can't technically "STEAL" information/ideas anyway, so most of your arguments regarding it being "Stolen" are irrelevant. "Unlawful reproduction" or transmission would be more appropriate, i guess. So just replace all of those terms with stolen and it should be AOK. The only way you can really "Steal" information is if you use it first, claim it was yours and/or get the benefits.
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:20 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.