Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
left  Wikileaks   Options  V right
Nedak
post Dec 3 2010, 10:40 PM
Post #1


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,794
Joined: 18-December 07
Member No.: 441



Love em', hate em'?


My favorite comment on the matter:
"Government discussions should be open to public viewing, after all, if they are speaking on my behalf I damn well have a right to know what they're saying."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jessica Rabbit
post Dec 3 2010, 11:27 PM
Post #2


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 1,374
Joined: 24-August 08
Member No.: 636



I just want to read them.

Unless you really have something to hide, I don't see why they would have a problem with it. I think most of the time they just classify things to keep us from knowing about how evil they really are.

For them to completely shut down a website......kinda fucked up. But they want to limit what we can view online anyways, so what better way to get the ball rolling on internet control legislation all in the name of security.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sunupu
post Dec 7 2010, 04:45 PM
Post #3


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,842
Joined: 23-February 08
Member No.: 474



[url=Here's a juicy one for ya.]http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2009/06/09KABUL1651.html[/url]

You know you can still go to the site if you type in the IP address, right? They only shut down the name.

213.251.145.96/



I do think there's some shit that the public shouldn't know, but Assange didn't start this. This whole issue needs to be talked about with some perspective. The Bush Administration commits treason releasing Valerie Plane's identity, nothing. CNN discloses military documents all the time, nada. Assange discloses diplomatic documents, it's "endangering American lives".

It's a power check. Assange can't be bought off. That's what scares them. He's not even really a journalist. He provides the source, no interpretations needed. Person--->Truth. No punditry, no way to distort the facts.

The only reason we're not ling in an intellectual dark age is because of people like Assange. He's biting the bullet for all of us. If it becomes rule of law that people like Assange can be shut down, we'll be left in the dark.

What I'm trying to say is DONATE SOME FUCKING MONEY TO THESE GUYS, RIGHT NOW.


--------------------
The best way to get over someone is to get under someone.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nedak
post Dec 7 2010, 05:16 PM
Post #4


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,794
Joined: 18-December 07
Member No.: 441



I believe that Assange is a REAL journalist.

Or at least...the definition of.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sunupu
post Dec 8 2010, 01:25 AM
Post #5


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,842
Joined: 23-February 08
Member No.: 474



I didn't mean it as a slam. God, why do you always feel the need to comment after me like a cunt?


--------------------
The best way to get over someone is to get under someone.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jessica Rabbit
post Dec 8 2010, 09:43 AM
Post #6


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 1,374
Joined: 24-August 08
Member No.: 636



QUOTE(sunupu @ Dec 8 2010, 01:25 AM) *

I didn't mean it as a slam. God, why do you always feel the need to comment after me like a cunt?


maybe its just cause your definition of a journalist in this post and others doesn't really make sense.

I can't speak for Assange's journalistic abilities bc i'm not even fully believing these cables aren't a planned release by our own government in an attempt to get the public behind more legislation to take more rights away from us. The stuff that is in these cables aren't really earth shattering revelations. I want to see cables on 9/11. They just put out pieces of damning comments. What was released is not the full story, and I am not even sure they have the full story.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
erin
post Dec 8 2010, 11:38 AM
Post #7


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 357
Joined: 31-May 08
From: Chicago, IL
Member No.: 573



QUOTE(sunupu @ Dec 7 2010, 04:45 PM) *

You know you can still go to the site if you type in the IP address, right? They only shut down the name.


You meant to say, they removed the DNS record.

While you're at it, download the lynx browser.



--------------------
JUSTREMEMBERTHATYOURESTANDINGONAPLANETTHATSEVOLVINGANDREVOLVINGATNINEHUNDREDMILE
SANHOURTHATSORBITINGATNINETEENMILESASECONDSOITSRECKONEDASUNTHATISTHESOURCEOFALLO
URPOWERTHESUNANDYOUANDMEANDALLTHESTARSTHATWECANSEEAREMOVINGATAMILLIONMILESADAYIN
ANOUTERSPIRALARMATFORTYTHOUSANDMILESANHOUROFTHEGALAXYWECALLTHEMILKYWAYOURGALAXYI
TSELFCONTAINSAHUNDREDBILLIONSTARSITSAHUNDREDTHOUSANDLIGHTYEARSSIDETOSIDEITBULGES
INTHEMIDDLESIXTEENTHOUSANDLIGHTYEARSTHICKBUTOUTBYUSITSJUSTTHREETHOUSANDLIGHTYEAR
SWIDEWERETHIRTYTHOUSANDLIGHTYEARSFROMGALACTICCENTRALPOINTWEGOROUNDEVERYTWOHUNDRE
DMILLIONYEARSANDOURGALAXYISONLYONEOFMILLIONSOFBILLIONSINTHISAMAZINGANDEXPANDINGU
NIVERSE
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nedak
post Dec 8 2010, 05:27 PM
Post #8


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,794
Joined: 18-December 07
Member No.: 441



QUOTE(sunupu @ Dec 8 2010, 02:25 AM) *

I didn't mean it as a slam. God, why do you always feel the need to comment after me like a cunt?

You are such a fucking child.

I was just commenting on your analysis of Wikileaks. I know you didn't mean it as a slam, I was just fucking say that I disagree with your view of "journalism". Christ, stop thinking that every time I respond to you it's an insult.

I'm like the kid on the playground that gets called a bully by a retard for no reason.



QUOTE
You meant to say, they removed the DNS record.

While you're at it, download the lynx browser.

Erin understands technology than Sunupu (now that was a slam).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Milky Cowboy
post Dec 8 2010, 08:29 PM
Post #9


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 883
Joined: 24-November 06
From: IDAHOOOO
Member No.: 10



QUOTE(Nedak @ Dec 8 2010, 06:27 PM) *

Erin understands technology than Sunupu (now that was a slam).


Erin also understands grammar than Sunupu (now that was a double slam).


--------------------
...and then we fucked them in the ass, and didn't even tell them...so they didn't even know....Bryan Rawson
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sunupu
post Dec 9 2010, 02:01 PM
Post #10


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,842
Joined: 23-February 08
Member No.: 474



How about a "could you elaborate" next time, instead of a "Well I disagree with your point because I don't understand what you mean"? I might word things improperly or fail to explain my ideas, but that doesn't give you license to use arbitrary passive-aggressive douche-baggery.

It's not journalism, because journalists collect and disseminate information. They filter the length and content of the story (and in most instances, this is done to appease corporate overlords and maximize profits). What Assange does is just collection and distribution. It's been referred to by some as "scientific journalism", but one of the prerequisites of journalism is filtering. Since Wikileaks doesn't do that, what it does can't be directly called journalism. It literally does not fit the definition.

"He's a REAL journalist." is, ironically, a childish statement. It's emotional, and completely avoids what I was trying to say. That's my point. I write four paragraphs on the subject, and you write two lines critisizing one sentence based on subjective bullshit reasoning.

Should I hold you by the hand next time and give you the definition of every word I type? Is it too much to ask for you to google search "definition: journalism" and actually analyze what I'm saying before acting like some 4chan scum-fuck?

Well, here's some definitions so you don't get confused, little Nedak. Maybe after I type these I can leave a note of your home address pinned to your shirt, so you don't get lost trying to go home.

Journalism (n.): The collecting, writing, editing, and presenting of news or news articles in newspapers, websites and magazines and in radio and television broadcasts.

fail (v.): To prove deficient or lacking; perform ineffectively or inadequately. Example: Erin understands technology than Sunupu (now that was a slam).

douche-baggery (n.): An overinflated sense of self-worth compounded by a lack of intelligence. See: Nedak.


--------------------
The best way to get over someone is to get under someone.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nedak
post Dec 11 2010, 12:27 AM
Post #11


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,794
Joined: 18-December 07
Member No.: 441



QUOTE(The Milky Cowboy @ Dec 8 2010, 09:29 PM) *

Erin also understands grammar than Sunupu (now that was a double slam).

You're really going to shit on me for one grammar mistake? Come on now.

QUOTE
How about a "could you elaborate" next time, instead of a "Well I disagree with your point because I don't understand what you mean"? I might word things improperly or fail to explain my ideas, but that doesn't give you license to use arbitrary passive-aggressive douche-baggery.

It's not journalism, because journalists collect and disseminate information. They filter the length and content of the story (and in most instances, this is done to appease corporate overlords and maximize profits). What Assange does is just collection and distribution. It's been referred to by some as "scientific journalism", but one of the prerequisites of journalism is filtering. Since Wikileaks doesn't do that, what it does can't be directly called journalism. It literally does not fit the definition.

"He's a REAL journalist." is, ironically, a childish statement. It's emotional, and completely avoids what I was trying to say. That's my point. I write four paragraphs on the subject, and you write two lines critisizing one sentence based on subjective bullshit reasoning.

Should I hold you by the hand next time and give you the definition of every word I type? Is it too much to ask for you to google search "definition: journalism" and actually analyze what I'm saying before acting like some 4chan scum-fuck?

Well, here's some definitions so you don't get confused, little Nedak. Maybe after I type these I can leave a note of your home address pinned to your shirt, so you don't get lost trying to go home.

Journalism (n.): The collecting, writing, editing, and presenting of news or news articles in newspapers, websites and magazines and in radio and television broadcasts.

fail (v.): To prove deficient or lacking; perform ineffectively or inadequately. Example: Erin understands technology than Sunupu (now that was a slam).

douche-baggery (n.): An overinflated sense of self-worth compounded by a lack of intelligence. See: Nedak.

Nice over-analysis, I'm sure that took you 30 minutes to type.

There is so much wrong with what you wrote it's hilarious. Grow the fuck up dude...I made one comment which you over-analyzed.


The only thing I'm going to critique in that abortion of a paragraph:
QUOTE
"He's a REAL journalist." is, ironically, a childish statement. It's emotional, and completely avoids what I was trying to say. That's my point. I write four paragraphs on the subject, and you write two lines critisizing one sentence based on subjective bullshit reasoning.

I said "I believe he's a real journalist". I didn't want to engage in a pointless debate of what we consider to be "journalism", I just wanted to say my opinion real quick. If you wanted to question WHY I believe that you could have done so. However, instead you decided to take that as a personal attack and then piss your pants while you write paragraphs about how I'm some big meanie bully.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Milky Cowboy
post Dec 11 2010, 01:08 AM
Post #12


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 883
Joined: 24-November 06
From: IDAHOOOO
Member No.: 10



Dude...I am so totally gonna shit on you for being a big mean bully...


--------------------
...and then we fucked them in the ass, and didn't even tell them...so they didn't even know....Bryan Rawson
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nedak
post Dec 11 2010, 01:21 AM
Post #13


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,794
Joined: 18-December 07
Member No.: 441



I'm sick of you being so milky.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sunupu
post Dec 11 2010, 01:31 AM
Post #14


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 2,842
Joined: 23-February 08
Member No.: 474



I don't think you're a bully. I said that once jokingly. I just think you could stand to elevate the conversation a bit.

And it doesn't really matter what your intent was. You came off as rude, I called you out on it. That's not the same thing as yelling, "CYBER-BULLY!".

QUOTE
You're really going to shit on me for one grammar mistake? Come on now.


Do you understand the concept of irony?


--------------------
The best way to get over someone is to get under someone.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Sandman
post Dec 11 2010, 10:20 AM
Post #15


sacrosanct
**********

Group: Sacred Members
Posts: 228
Joined: 9-March 08
Member No.: 489



Ron Paul speaks for me regarding Wikileaks:


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 10th December 2018 - 06:40 PM
Skin created by Vanson Studios, © 2006 Sacred Cow Productions