US slams 'criminals' behind WikiLeaks

I don't like the gov't so I guess I'm biased, but they do do their jobs and get things done, nothing that'll really change anything. I do't think I could do a better job, but its my right as an american citizen is to criticize the govt
 
I really don't argue that the US goverment or any other goverment is completly without bad actions and such - i just say wikileaks and Assange don't shun to use the same bad actions to get to their goal.
So pointing fingers on the USA for spying on goverments is hilarious when you're doing it yourself.
And therefore i belive if Assange was in the same position as the USA he would simply do the same things.

@Crni Vuk
Well i guess we wouldn't be better than they but might look better than for example Merkel ;)
 
thegaresexperience said:
I don't like the gov't so I guess I'm biased, but they do do their jobs and get things done, nothing that'll really change anything. I do't think I could do a better job, but its my right as an american citizen is to criticize the govt
Click to expand...
Thats not the issue. I do critize the german gouvernemt a lot as well. But I think one should know specificaly what to criticize then just saying "uuuh Bush suuuuxs" or those generic "gouvernent sucuuucks" comments ;)
 
Believe it or not I don't/didn't hate Bush. i criticize the fact that they think they operate with the assumption that they know what people need to know (yes there are certain things that need to be kept secret, ie military locations and certain names). and the fact that we give them power and both sides of the aisle are trying to fuck us every chance they get. With this wikileaks issue they show their true colors again by attacking the man who is at no legal fault here. They turned the media and public against him as opposed to addressing the real issue of who ACTUALLY LEAKED THE INTEL. if this information is sooo top secret then it shouldn't be hard to find out who did it and put them to a trial. i don't care what you think about Assange, if hes scum, a hero, a traitor, it doesn't matter he is a non-issue essentially.

Call me a cynic but i don't trust the govt to make good decisions anymore, at least in regards to big issues, especially because both sides are pandering instead of doing what should actually be done. I respect politicians a lot more if they at least tried to do what they said they were going to do, not lie to the uninformed masses giving them the happy-go lucky/America, Fuck Yeah speech.

(and btw most of my posts are written when I'm in class so i don't have time to full write out my ideas, like now, i'm actually about to leave for work)
 
thegaresexperience said:
i don't care what you think about Assange, if hes scum, a hero, a traitor, it doesn't matter he is a non-issue essentially.
Click to expand...

Assange does matter because he was the one who leaked it to the world. If he did not step in, the information wouldn't have gotten out and become public.

Call me a cynic but i don't trust the govt to make good decisions anymore, at least in regards to big issues, especially because both sides are pandering instead of doing what should actually be done. I respect politicians a lot more if they at least tried to do what they said they were going to do, not lie to the uninformed masses giving them the happy-go lucky/America, Fuck Yeah speech.
Click to expand...

The problem with many politicians is that they only want to be reelected, not to make a difference. Since they make a career out of politics, one mistake can put them out of house and home as it were. It would be better if politicians did not cling so strongly to their positions (mandatory term limit for all offices or something). That, or if things were judged on merit rather than "style."
 
Any government run on the basic of "elections", is going to suffer from the style over substance problem.

The problem lies in the fact that Joe Schmoe always wants something more. They are ussually naive so they don't work it out that pie in the sky promises won't happen or takes a long time to change.

Therefore charismatic sheisters easily take advantage of the nation through being "fake". Then again, what is the alternative to such a government?
 
DarkCorp said:
Any government run on the basic of "elections", is going to suffer from the style over substance problem.

The problem lies in the fact that Joe Schmoe always wants something more. They are ussually naive so they don't work it out that pie in the sky promises won't happen or takes a long time to change.

Therefore charismatic sheisters easily take advantage of the nation through being "fake". Then again, what is the alternative to such a government?
Click to expand...

but... but... HE PROMISED CHANGE!!!!
 
I would not be always that hard with politicans. I would go so far to say that some really had good intentions. But there is just so much you can do before you run in some opposition. To change really something it means that people have to give you as well the right or support to do so. It doesnt help to make laws no one supports for example or where you dont get any votes or if you have to change so much with it that it basically does nothing anymore in the end.

I always see it with Guatanamo and the idea to close it which was one target. But to just say that is one thing, to work with the opposition is another as there are for sure many which really support it thinking the US needs such a prisson or place. Not to mention the people who are in charge of Guatanamo and for sure have some political influence and friends they ask for help so they dont loose ... well their job eventually I mean what will you do with a general who is in charge over there ? He might not be happy ending in Alaska or something like that (Its more a joke, but you know what I mean).

I am sure as said many have good intentions. But that alone changes nothing.
 
@crni

I don't think its being hard on politicians, atleast with the real sheisters like corporate interests. And military industrial compex.

What I am pointing out is because that Joe Average is the way it is, politicians have to lie. Folks always want to believe that heaven has finally come around and politicians take advantage. That things can be solved easily through sheer desire.

Although I would have to admit that this type of government beats the hell out of one that accomplishes the same but through violence.
 
Little Robot said:
The problem with many politicians is that they only want to be reelected, not to make a difference. Since they make a career out of politics, one mistake can put them out of house and home as it were. It would be better if politicians did not cling so strongly to their positions (mandatory term limit for all offices or something). That, or if things were judged on merit rather than "style."
Click to expand...

Well, the thing is, most politicians are career politicians, but not necessarily in the same job positions - Sure, Charlie Rangel's been a congressman for longer than I've been alive, but most politicians basically bounce around a slew of appointed and elected positions. Term limits may stop a man from being senator in perpetuity, but before he's even become senator he's already been in politics for twenty years.

Not that it matters - any sort of electoral reform is doomed to be ineffective in the face of corporate contributions, and we've basically paved the way for them to effectively buy the government at will. Basically speaking, even if you had a Good Politician in the form of a Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, he wouldn't even be elected without kowtowing to corporate interests because they're the ones who fund the campaigns in this country.

Our Mr. Smith might make it to city councilor or maybe even state senator before his populist fervor runs out, he's spent more time in politics than out of it, and needs big, big bucks to continue on to higher office. That's just a baseline: It doesn't matter what he says - you just can't hear it until the corporations give him enough money to take out TV ads and travel cross-country. In short, our system is universally corrupting.
 
If you are politician and you lie, people die because of you, you kill innocent people, you make fake evidences to break out wars that's cool.

If someone gets some info about it and upload it to the Internet. That is a CRIME.

:roll:
 
People aren't disputing whether or not what the politicians/responsible parties did was right, ffs. People are disputing something else entirely. If, as a spy, you kill a man to get secret documents from another country-- that's wrong. But if I release all your information and information about other people, it only endangers more people.

Just blurring the names of the people put at risk by these documents-- foreigners who work for the US, for example-- would have been much more forgivable.
 
the_cpl said:
If you are politician and you lie, people die because of you, you kill innocent people, you make fake evidences to break out wars that's cool.

If someone gets some info about it and upload it to the Internet. That is a CRIME.

:roll:
Click to expand...
Ah, finally someone got it.
 
It's interesting that the leaks surfaced about the time the North Koreans attacked... Would China have something to do with the leaks? Did the Koreans plan the attack to match what they thought would be a moment of weakness in the west?
 
Blakut said:
It's interesting that the leaks surfaced about the time the North Koreans attacked... Would China have something to do with the leaks? Did the Koreans plan the attack to match what they thought would be a moment of weakness in the west?
Click to expand...

What? We've been over this, China would not screw over America, at least not yet. And they have nothing to gain from North korea winning a war, it's actually more in their favor if they didn't, since it would keep America happy.
 
Little Robot said:
People aren't disputing whether or not what the politicians/responsible parties did was right, ffs. People are disputing something else entirely. If, as a spy, you kill a man to get secret documents from another country-- that's wrong. But if I release all your information and information about other people, it only endangers more people.

Just blurring the names of the people put at risk by these documents-- foreigners who work for the US, for example-- would have been much more forgivable.
Click to expand...

Haha, that's a good one. So if a group of people rape women, you don't want to do anything about it, you don't report it to the police or anything, because then maybe more people get injured. Wow.

Anyway, the infos are out and no one died yet. Not like in the past several years because the stupid wars.

What is happened about the Mohammad drawings? All the media, the press and the politicians said "it's ok, it's the freedom of speech, people can say or draw whatever things they want and they can put that on the Internet".
What they say now? People can't share things on the Internet.

When the Mohammad thing happened, then people died, buildings burned down, dozens (or hundreds) of people got injured. But they said that was ok. On the other hand if someone is telling the truth about them, they arrest the guy who sharing the truth.

If someone did really bad things, crimes and such, that person's name shouldn't be blurred.
Even if you do a not too serious crime, your name, personal infos and even your photo goes to the Internet. The police upload those things. So don't tell me the war criminals and serious criminal shouldn't be mentioned and their names, infos and photos should be blurred.

For example, the government "collected" informations in countries, not just names, IP and phone numbers, but ID card numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, SSL numbers too. This is a serious crime in most of the countries. That is shocking how these people are not behind bars yet. But you saysing even their names should be blurred? I think it's unacceptable.
 
Julian Assange is just the messenger...I can't see how the Western powers pursuing him and Wikileaks will ever be able to look the Chinese in the eyes and complain about freedom of speech, and the censoring of the Internet...fucking hypocrites. :roll:

I predict Assange will be awarded the 'Nobel Peace Prize' within a few years. :mrgreen:

Julian-Assange-006.jpg
 
Bulero, you are wrong. Collecting informations -illegally- about innocent people and sharing informations about a crime is not the same. As far as I know the Wikileaks guys didn't spy, they just got the info from somebody and they uploaded those things to the net.

I just heard the US government telling their employees if they read the Wiki infos or they comment it, they can loose their jobs. :roll: Isn't that anti-Constitutional?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top