Offline
Yeah, that's been around for a while, we just have to search up its activities. Plus, sometimes the movies even show us how corrupted the system can be.
That's what happens when capitalism gets to your head. You get black operations. Forum
Off Topic Ecuador grants asylum to Assange
Ecuador grants asylum to Assange
31 repliesYeah, that's been around for a while, we just have to search up its activities. Plus, sometimes the movies even show us how corrupted the system can be.
That's what happens when capitalism gets to your head. You get black operations. 
Phenixtri has written<random stuff> it confirms the suspicions that the US is an imperialistic nation that bribes and manipulates weaker nations to its benefit and that it wages war for """profit""" NOT freedom, combating so called terrorism, or for revenge for 911 <random stuff>
NO FUCKING SHIT. That's why it could cause a war.
Also, I don't think you really have all of those documents. Unless you can provide proof, but then you can be prosecuted.
@
pupp3tStudios: Capitalism is better than communism, at least. pupp3tStudios: You can't say that capitalism isn't the same these days. A political system always stays the same. It's countries that go from one system to another.I personally, don't support invasion of Iraq, if we started to talk about that, but I don't see any other solution to the 9/11 problem. If the US government, including Bush, didn't act, the whole country could've been bombed. The was the only possible response to the September attacks. And although it wasn't a pretty one, there was no other way.
palomino: 9/11 has nothing to do with Iraq. Capitalism may stay the same, but the government is abusing it.
palomino has written@ Mc Leaf: I hoped better from you. Turns out you are like those sheep. Bush was one of the best things that happened to America in the past 20 or 30 years.
Mc Leaf: I hoped better from you. Turns out you are like those sheep. Bush was one of the best things that happened to America in the past 20 or 30 years. palomino has writtenWhat would you do if your country lived through a massive terrorist attack?
I mean... isn't war one of these things which always results in new terrorism? I think, that's actually clear.
palomino has writtenSit still? It wasn't a good thing to do, but sadly it was the only way to respond.
So... which of both sides started it at all? You would say "the terrorists", the terrorists would say "America", but who is right? Obviously society is a complex system, where such monocausal thinking just makes no sense. The causalities of a conflict are often reaching far into history (I guess, you already know about the role of the CIA regarding Al-Quaida, when there was that Soviet war in Afghanistan in the 80s, for example). And on the other hand the USA have had a quite bad reputation for centuries, because of their imperialist and capitalist policy.
Anyway, both sides have chosen the policy of escalation, which inevitably must result someday in a disaster. Some people also call it 'spiral of violence'.
Just look. Did we solved the problem, did we? Isn't there any terror in Afghanistan and Iraq now? And isn't it also true, that the anti-American sentiments just got new updraft by these two wars*, and that for example now Pakistan is drifting into new extremism...?
*And other things, like the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, which is actually a quite good point. You have argued that Assange is a criminal because he has spread information that could ignite conflicts, right? But on the other side - namely in the upper case, for example - most people oddly enough tend to a very different attitude, when they are faced with the same allegations, and brandish the flag of freedom of speech, expression and press...
palomino has written@ pupp3tStudios: Capitalism is better than communism, at least.
pupp3tStudios: Capitalism is better than communism, at least.Iraq wasn't the only country attacked by the US.
pupp3tStudios has writtenIraq attacked the U.S. in retaliation. We bombed their land after the Gulf War, and you can bet they're going to be pissed.
Capitalism may stay the same, but the government is abusing it.
Capitalism may stay the same, but the government is abusing it.
Iraq invaded Kuwait and killed innocent people. So the US decided to help, but it was also due to the hope of getting oil-rich territories.
@
Mc Leaf: Then turn your brain on and tell me what was the other solution. You can't find one BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE. 9/11 was a blunt, straight-forward attack. The only way to respond to it was to carry out a counter-attack.Also, are you saying that Assange isn't a criminal? He is a sick man used by the Russian government.
Drawing cartoons in a newspaper is one thing, posting REAL secret documents depicting REAL events is completely different.
palomino has written@ Mc Leaf: Then turn your brain on and tell me what was the other solution. You can't find one BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE. 9/11 was a blunt, straight-forward attack. The only way to respond to it was to carry out a counter-attack.
Mc Leaf: Then turn your brain on and tell me what was the other solution. You can't find one BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE. 9/11 was a blunt, straight-forward attack. The only way to respond to it was to carry out a counter-attack.And also it is not my job to suggest better solutions, since... it is simply not my job (luckily...). But in any case I firmly decline any solution which obviously just leads to new problems, like in the present case.
Protective measures (these 'sky marshals' aren't a bad idea at all, for example), or helping with economic and development assistance (schools, hospitals...) for a country's population, which would take the wind out of the terrorists' sails regarding their propaganda against the US, could be some alternative solutions. Should also be much cheaper than fighting a war, which is only based on destructive forces, shouldn't it? In any case I can't see any progress due the US' war on terror. Al-Quaida is almost history, but "the" (lol) terrorism now comes from other countries, like Pakistan. So what is your solution here and now? Invading one country after another, and after all territories getting under "control" (lol), proceeding with the 'war' in the interior of the own country? Like in Oakland (Occupy...), or in Seattle (G8, WTO...)...?
Yes, yes, I know what you think, dude. All those 'evil' people (which increasingly were declared as terrorists, too
) also have started the struggle first, but which is just another kind of embarrassing bullshitting. Anyways, destruction, escalation, confrontation always lead to war, while cooperation, deescalation and assistance promotes peace. Actually a quite simple conclusion obtained by an analysis from the perspective of systems theory (or by using brain).
palomino has writtenAlso, are you saying that Assange isn't a criminal?
Also laws aren't some kind of universal, untouchable and everlasting truth. They were made by quite usual and mortal people, which on the other hand often don't represent the majority. And by the way it is actually also forbidden to sing in a Russian Orthodox church punk prayers...
So, how do you exactly define "criminal"...?!
Yes, of course... it's 'forbidden' to publish documents of "national security" (lol). It's 'forbidden' to break into the databases of credit card companies, and it is 'forbidden' to occupy public places... And so the hole thing seems quite simple: denounce, accuse, arrest.
But torture in Abu Ghraib, Waterboarding in CIA-Prisons, or striking down unarmed civilians in Afghanistan... - many of those things which moves the USA closer to dictatorships lika Russia or China could only be published, because people like Assange give a damn on 'laws', which are mostly not identical with 'rights'.
In so far you might be right... Publications of the filth of the U.S. government would only draw resentment for themselves, and incite further protests against this pig system. But then the blame is ultimately with the system itself, and not with those who bring disgraces to the public and fight against them.
palomino has writtenHe is a sick man used by the Russian government.
Hardly lol! I guess you have some evidences (no fake documents by CIA, please), or does it remain at some arbitrary imputation, not to say tacky propaganda? palomino has writtenDrawing cartoons in a newspaper is one thing, posting REAL secret documents depicting REAL events is completely different.
Does the US-government have something to hide? Because...
Those who have nothing to hide, have nothing to fear, don't they?! Wasn't it exactly the main argument for expanding surveillance techniques against the people and put them under general suspicion?! Yes, yes, clearly... in this case it is a whole completely different thing again...
When individuals need to be monitored, then powerful institutions even more so. And if they even evade democratic control, then whistleblowing seems to be not a very good thing, but apparently the only way to respond...
Mc Leaf: I live in Europe, not the US, so I know about European laws. Presumption of innocence exists in the US as well.What you said was "It's not my job to suggest better solutions". That is the problem with today's society. People, even people like you, who seem to know what they are talking about, criticize politicians, but don't know what were the other choices for them. They don't know what they like, they just say they dislike the choices the politician has made but when asked what they would like they can't answer, because they don't know. Don't do that in your future discussions, please
I did not say that I support the invasion of Arabic countries. I am saying that it was the only way to respond to the attacks, from my opinion. It wouldn't stop the Muslim-Non-believer war, and I am sure Bush knew that, but if 9/11 went unanswered, there wouldn't be a threat of another attack from the outside, but also from the inside.
My definition of a criminal is someone who hurts people or does something on purpose that may hurt people. That's what Assange did. I would support him if he posted documents on how imperfect the economical systems of countries are, the number of people living below the poverty line in different places in the world, the levels of corruption in different countries. Yet, he posted documents that can seriously damage relations between countries and even incite a war.
Also, I just lost it when you said "no fake documents by CIA, please". I hoped better from you. However, if you want evidence, here it is:
1) There are no documents on WikiLeaks that could in a serious way harm Russia and its relations with other countries.
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tomorrow#Production
No matter how much I hate using Wikipedia in a discussion, I am not using it as an argument, but to back my point up with information.
Assange's World Tomorrow was originally broadcast and supported by RT, a TV channel funded by the Russian Government. Also, Assange stated that he was not able to interview Mikhail Khodorkovsky. The former head of Yukos, and the wealthiest man in Russia (2004), who was suddenly charged with fraud, and Yukos' shares were frozen by Putin afterwards.
You state that if someone who has nothing to hide has nothing to fear. It is true, but if a country made mistakes that may harm relations with other countries or start a war, then they should be hidden. Some things are meant to be not known.
Also, did you know that it was Bush who released Moazzam Begg? Even with Pentagon, FBI and the CIA being against it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moazzam_Begg
EDIT: So, um, nothing else to discuss here? Can mods please lock this topic if no post is made here in the next 24 hours? Thank you.
edited 1×, last 28.08.12 05:03:10 pm
palomino has writtenEDIT: So, um, nothing else to discuss here? Can mods please lock this topic if no post is made here in the next 24 hours? Thank you.
).I also hate eternal discussions and don't want to widen that dialogue to that. So just this answer, and a next one would be my last (so two for you, if you want).
palomino has written@ Mc Leaf: I live in Europe, not the US, so I know about European laws. Presumption of innocence exists in the US as well.
Mc Leaf: I live in Europe, not the US, so I know about European laws. Presumption of innocence exists in the US as well.Oh... welcome in the club.
(GB, I guess)
palomino has writtenWhat you said was "It's not my job to suggest better solutions". That is the problem with today's society. People, even people like you, who seem to know what they are talking about, criticize politicians, but don't know what were the other choices for them. They don't know what they like, they just say they dislike the choices the politician has made but when asked what they would like they can't answer, because they don't know. Don't do that in your future discussions, please
No, wait. You got there something wrong...
First, I'm pretty sure, that I know what I'm talking about, since my criticism did not fell from a tree, but is the result of dealing with the whole subject matter and also coincides largely with the opinion of many, many other people around the world, who are for professional reasons more familiar with the matter, than I am. On the other hand my criticism is not that kind of "I'm somehow against everything"-opinion, where are no arguments behind it.
palomino has written...but if 9/11 went unanswered, there wouldn't be a threat of another attack from the outside, but also from the inside.
palomino has writtenMy definition of a criminal is someone who hurts people or does something on purpose that may hurt people.
palomino has writtenThat's what Assange did.
But I'm quite sure, that Assange did not hurt any people (at most he was maybe involved in some scuffle at school or something like that).
palomino has writtenI would support him if he posted documents on how imperfect the economical systems of countries are, the number of people living below the poverty line in different places in the world, the levels of corruption in different countries.
palomino has writtenYet, he posted documents that can seriously damage relations between countries and even incite a war.
This, for example, is one of these many puzzle parts, which (can) lead to terrorism - even years later - but of course all the blame will be on the other side again...
Regarding Assange... I would advise him, being more discreet, since the whole stuff is a sensitive matter. But of course the world has to be informed about activities and relationships between their leaders. Think of China, Russia, Germany in the early 20th century, or other regimes, which of course allways try to conway a clean slate in general public...
But as I already said, it is a sensitive matter and one man alone can't make those decisions, which documents may published, and which not (but afaik there are a lot of more people behind Wikileaks).
palomino has writtenHowever, if you want evidence, here it is:
1) There are no documents on WikiLeaks that could in a serious way harm Russia and its relations with other countries.
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tomorrow#Production
No matter how much I hate using Wikipedia in a discussion, I am not using it as an argument, but to back my point up with information.
Assange's World Tomorrow was originally broadcast and supported by RT, a TV channel funded by the Russian Government.
1) There are no documents on WikiLeaks that could in a serious way harm Russia and its relations with other countries.
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tomorrow#Production
No matter how much I hate using Wikipedia in a discussion, I am not using it as an argument, but to back my point up with information.
Assange's World Tomorrow was originally broadcast and supported by RT, a TV channel funded by the Russian Government.
palomino has writtenAlso, Assange stated that he was not able to interview Mikhail Khodorkovsky. The former head of Yukos, and the wealthiest man in Russia (2004), who was suddenly charged with fraud, and Yukos' shares were frozen by Putin afterwards.
palomino has writtenAlso, did you know that it was Bush who released Moazzam Begg? Even with Pentagon, FBI and the CIA being against it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moazzam_Begg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moazzam_Begg
Mc Leaf: If you want to we can move this discussion to Skype, I am sure it will be easier for us both and you wouldn't need to waste time on those replies. (I do think your English is too good for wasting a whole hour on a reply, though). Also, sorry for not quoting your post, but I will try to write my replies so, that each paragraph would correspond to one of your points.-----------------------------------------------
No, I am from Estonia, which was stated on my profile a while ago.
My point was that you said it wasn't your job to say what would have been a better solution. That's what I was criticizing. You should never say that because if you weren't discussing this matter with me, but with some other person, he could've quoted that sole phrase a couple million times, called you an idiot and would have stopped the discussion. I know a couple of people personally who would do that.
Yes, it's a speculation. However, would you stay calm if you knew that a massive terrorist attack happened, thousands of people died and the symbol of trade relations (the Twin Towers WERE the symbol of trade relations as they were the headquarters of the World Trade Center) collapsed, and your government would sit there and talk about diplomacy and we-are-working-on-it? Now imagine Americans, who are probably the biggest patriots after Russians (however, Russians only use patriotism to rob and kill). Sure, the government knew that and one of the reasons for the Invasion might've been their fear of being overthrown for idleness.
I don't find anything sloppy in my definition of criminality. Every crime hurts someone, either physically or mentally.
Assange is probably one of the reasons for the Arab Spring, and, even though I support their will to be free, democratic nations, the casualties were huge, and they still are. What is the point in fighting for freedom of your nation if in the end there will be no one left to enjoy that freedom? However, being a criminal is not just committing a crime, but planning one, or performing certain actions that would lead to one. That is what Assange did, by releasing potentially harmful documents.
Good that you agreed with me on this one
And again. A piece of art shouldn't be taken seriously. None of those people had the power to decide that people must know what is happening. Knowing the truth isn't always the right thing.
He could've broadcast his shows on YouTube or ThePirateBay. You can't imagine how many American sites there are who do this kind of stuff.
China is another thing. He couldn't have gone there, nor could he ask for the release of Ai, as it's China. The Chinese are arrogant assholes, that's a fact. Not all, but a lot. While with Russia, he had all the power and all the resources to get Khodorkovsky. Yet, he couldn't.
Just that you and others seem to hate on Bush so much and say he had never done a good thing, while that isn't true.
EDIT: I know that Mc Leaf might be tracking this thread, so I am bumping it. Can mods please not close it as it is probably the only thread in the Off-Topic section that is serious?
edited 1×, last 11.10.12 06:03:19 pm