I-Mockery Forum

I-Mockery Forum (http://i-mockery.com/forum/index.php)
-   Philosophy, Politics, and News (http://i-mockery.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   WikiLeaks (http://i-mockery.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69705509)

MLE Dec 18th, 2010 11:06 PM

When deciding the sides of who wins a debate, I don't just consider the points that are made, but also whether or not the person acted like a child or not- resorting to petty insults and such.

Just thought you'd like to know how you come across to everyone else, Mr. Garn.

The Leader Dec 18th, 2010 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pentegarn (Post 708115)
And by the way, anyone thick enough to honestly believe communism is a good thing despite it repeatedly failing everywhere it is implemented has no right whatsoever telling anyone their arguments are retarded. :lol

Where has communism ever actually been implemented? Or are you just talking about the governments that claim that they are "socialist" and "communist" even as a handful of elites exploit the labor of the proletariat?

Zhukov Dec 19th, 2010 04:05 AM

If you're done then be done; every thread that I post an opinion in doesn't have to eventually make it's way back to how wrong my political ideas are.

Quote:

First and foremost, I am enjoying this discussion immensely. A ton of good stuff was said in the last 24 hours and I am sorry I missed out on it till now
What happened?

kahljorn Dec 19th, 2010 06:11 AM

I think they make a good point though. how valid can your political views be if they all involve your religious view

Pentegarn Dec 19th, 2010 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MLE (Post 708119)
When deciding the sides of who wins a debate, I don't just consider the points that are made, but also whether or not the person acted like a child or not- resorting to petty insults and such.

Just thought you'd like to know how you come across to everyone else, Mr. Garn.

Oh like when Zhukov called me retarded or said I think the holocaust should have been covered up?

But why would I expect any sort of consistency from you, that would be silly

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zhukov (Post 708151)
What happened?

I think I just answered that one for you

Zhukov Dec 19th, 2010 07:12 AM

No, I said your arguments are getting retarded (Julian Assange is a cyber terrorist thief, and wikileaks is a dedicated anti-American propaganda machine - really? :\) and only asked you whether the holocaust should have been uncovered or not - since you were saying that governments should have the right to keep whatever secrets they deem necessary.

Pentegarn Dec 19th, 2010 07:16 AM

Implications like you made are as good as saying it directly, and you knew that when you posted it

Zhukov Dec 19th, 2010 07:22 AM

I wasn't implying anything other than what I said. The fact that you think wikileaks can't be trusted (or that's what I assume you are saying) because Julian Assange hacks into US military computers and steals secret documents IS retarded.

Pentegarn Dec 19th, 2010 01:26 PM

So your big defense of Assange is he didn't directly hack things and steal information himself? That others did it for him? That he created a place that encourages these acts therefore his hands are washed of these actions?

Sorry, that defense doesn't work. But since you like holocaust comparisons so much, let's use it right back on you to show you why. Hitler ordered the killing of 6 million Jewish people, and then let his men carry out the orders, so by your belief that the burden of guilt belongs only on those who directly acted, that would absolve him of the Holocaust. Yet, history disagrees with you, and so do I

The Leader Dec 19th, 2010 02:56 PM

I think that Zhukov thinks that you're saying that the information that wikileaks released is not credible or something and I think that you think that military secrets and crap like that which would get people killed should not be released to the public, but I have yet to see any information released that would in fact pose a grave threat to national security. Everything that I have read in these leaks is largely information that anyone semi-interested in foreign relations and US politics would be able to infer or safely assume just from reading about it over time from the general media.

This includes the list of facilities which are listed as being vital to the United State's security in the leaks. Ports? Oil pipelines? Manufacturing plants? Mines? Communication systems? OH WOW THANK YOU WIKI LEAKS I WOULD HAVE NEVER KNOWN THESE THINGS COULD BE IMPORTANT OR THEIR LOCATIONS WITHOUT YOU

Because I'm sure that terrorists and other states don't have access to an online search engine, maps or common sense but do have access to wikileaks.

kahljorn Dec 19th, 2010 04:33 PM

why put all of the work into searching when you can just pull up wikileaks and have everything you need? Wikileaks is like a superwalmart for terrorists

executioneer Dec 19th, 2010 04:48 PM

well so is google, then

kahljorn Dec 19th, 2010 05:16 PM

Quote:

why put all of the work into searching
gahoiefaho

Blasted Child Dec 19th, 2010 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pentegarn (Post 707658)
Actually, I am going to just say I am tried of warning you about what total transparency will do. If you can't, or you refuse to see the big picture, if 'social justice' is more important to you than life, so be it. The only way to fix the sort of destructive mentality that I am seeing is to simply quit trying to stop it, quit trying to reason with those who refuse to see. Instead, I will let it happen

So go on, bang the drum, get your victory against the big bad governments of the world. Millions will suffer, but you'll satisfy your indignation at all the injustice of the world so who cares about those people right?

But in the end, know what will happen?

Something worse will take its place. it won't just be America that falls though, who will buy the world products if America falls?

Enjoy the destroyed world you are screaming for, but understand this, every thing bad that happens as a result will be greeted with a big fat I told you so, all of it. Every single event. So sit in your little inclusive thinktanks, whine about fairness, act like your ideals that history has repeatedly proven cannot be will work this time when it has yet to, and when you find out how unfair 'total fairness' actually turns out to be, I will at least be able to take solace in the fact that you too will suffer from your own hubris.

Once that happens, maybe those of you who refuse to care about the consequences will have learned something, the ones left alive after the world is embroiled in war, famine, and death anyway

Will the world end because of WW3? Alien attacks? A Meteor??? Nuclear bombs???
NO YOU FOOLS ITS FROM TOO MUCH TRANSPARENCY!
THERE IS NOTHING AS DESCTRUCTIVE AS FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY!!!
PENTEGARN WILL SAY "I TOLD YOU SO!" FOR HE HATH FORESEEN THE APOCALYPSE

executioneer Dec 19th, 2010 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kahljorn (Post 708210)
gahoiefaho

what, like google-searching is hard or something

kahljorn Dec 20th, 2010 02:04 AM

sometimes

executioneer Dec 20th, 2010 02:45 AM

man they should just mandate links to tvtropes be put on everything wikileaks posts, then everyone will be too distracted to do terrorism based on their information

kahljorn Dec 20th, 2010 06:53 AM

COUNTER-TERRORIST WILLIE

Zhukov Dec 20th, 2010 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pentegarn (Post 708190)
So your big defense of Assange is he didn't directly hack things and steal information himself? That others did it for him? That he created a place that encourages these acts therefore his hands are washed of these actions?

Sorry, that defense doesn't work. But since you like holocaust comparisons so much, let's use it right back on you to show you why. Hitler ordered the killing of 6 million Jewish people, and then let his men carry out the orders, so by your belief that the burden of guilt belongs only on those who directly acted, that would absolve him of the Holocaust. Yet, history disagrees with you, and so do I

"Your belief that the burden of guilt belongs only to those who directly acted..."

Ah, no. Stop making things up. You've only come to that conclusion through a warping of your own ideas and opinions. Assange neither hacked for these things, nor told other people to hack or steal it. Christ, nothing was hacked into or stolen - it was LEAKED. Wikileaks didn't need to steal it since it was GIVEN TO THEM by people wishing to LEAK the information. Those people in turn had it given to them or put in their responsibility.

Now, which is it - Assange steals military secrets, or he has people steal it for him? Either way it's dumb, but I want to know what you are saying here. While you are there, where are you getting your proof that Assange is hacking into things?

Also;
Quote:

That he created a place that encourages these acts...
Are you saying that wikileaks ENCOURAGES people to hack into the military and steal information? How does it encourage them? Does it pay them? Any leaked documents are submitted anonymously.

While we are here, and since you are not as done as you say you are; what military secrets are we talking about? The ones that will bring about the destruction of American society should they become public.


Blasted Child:

I am too scared to even think up the situation where government transparency brings about the FALL OF MAN. I'm sure it exists.

Blasted Child Dec 20th, 2010 09:10 AM


Zhukov Dec 20th, 2010 09:22 AM

:lol

kahljorn Dec 20th, 2010 12:27 PM

Quote:

Christ, nothing was hacked into or stolen - it was LEAKED. Wikileaks didn't need to steal it since it was GIVEN TO THEM by people wishing to LEAK the information. Those people in turn had it given to them or put in their responsibility.
Doesn't the whole idea of leaking imply that it was stolen information sorta? Like when somebody "leaks" a movie (WHICH PEOPLE GET ARRESTED/SUED FOR BY THE WAY) or videogame its considered theft. You say that like the people leaking the information have a right to leak it. it wasn't given to them or put into their responsibility meaning they could do whatever they want with it.
Also leaking military information is considered a crime labeled as SEDITION and you can get court-martialed and shit from it. So, yea, actually wikileaks is encouraging an environment of sedition.

As for transparency hurting a country I'm sure we can think of something :O
I'm sure there's been some stock market crashes/depressions caused by transparency which incited a panic in people.

Blasted Child Dec 20th, 2010 12:50 PM

Newsflash! Stock market crashes and the depression weren't caused by the flawed mechanism of capitalism! It wasn't because bankers deliberately inflated the value of their shares, it wasn't because people borrowed money they couldn't pay back, encouraged by cynical and short-sighted politicans and already mentioned bankers, or housing bubbles that just had to burst, no no no!
WHAT WAS IT? I WONDER IF IT WAS THAT WRETCHED TRANSPARENCY AGAIN!!!?

Dimnos Dec 20th, 2010 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pentegarn (Post 708065)
Why would journalism require a degree? Because it does. You have to go to college to get a journalism degree. Try going to CNN without a journalism degree and applying for a journalist position...


Wolf Blitzer
Does not have a degree in Journalism.


A.J. Hammer
Does not have a degree in Journalism


My main man Anderson Cooper
Does not have a degree in Journalism


Larry King
Didnt even go to college.


Ted Turner (founder of CNN)
Was expelled from collage.

Blasted Child Dec 20th, 2010 01:10 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:16 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.