Thread: WikiLeaks
View Single Post
Pentegarn Pentegarn is offline
Pentegarn's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a dystopian present
Pentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contestPentegarn won the popularity contest
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 06:32 AM       
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