Thread: WikiLeaks
View Single Post
  #220  
Zhukov Zhukov is offline
Supa Soviet Missil Mastar
Zhukov's Avatar
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tasmania
Old Dec 22nd, 2010, 04:05 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