User Controls
ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
-
2019-04-10 at 6 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Obama himself used to go on national television and announce troop movements and intentions well in advance, complete with dates and locations, with the terrorists listening in with ears wide open, and nobody batted an eyelash. Funny how that happens, eh?
but obama is black.
and we know what this means. -
2019-04-10 at 7:59 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 8:05 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 8:10 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 8:11 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny they are not directly responsible. they released information. bad people used this information and as a result these volunteer solders die.
totse hosted informations like anarchists cookbook. say someone used that information to cause damage or death do you hold totse and jeff hunter responsible ?
true totseans would give a resounding no.
faggots like you are the reason the internet has gotten as shitty and as restrictive as it is today.
Sure it's directly responsible, it's classified information that was released by Wikileaks. No wikileak, no deaths. They could have released the same information minus operationally sensitive details. That's what they already try to do but they have fucked up in the past. No wikileaks leak, no info, no damage.
By contrast, no totse hosting doesn't necessarily mean no one will find the anarchist's cookbook. -
2019-04-10 at 8:12 PM UTCKrow = Totse2K1 = mentally ill
-
2019-04-10 at 8:14 PM UTC
Originally posted by Common De-mominator Sure it's directly responsible, it's classified information that was released by Wikileaks. No wikileak, no deaths. They could have released the same information minus operationally sensitive details. That's what they already try to do but they have fucked up in the past. No wikileaks leak, no info, no damage.
By contrast, no totse hosting doesn't necessarily mean no one will find the anarchist's cookbook.
if wikileaks didnt leak it, someone else would. -
2019-04-10 at 8:16 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 8:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny if wikileaks didnt leak it, someone else would.
Then they would be responsible for the same damage. Similarly when some dumb shit "doxxed" Zimmerman incorrectly on Twitter and some asshole arsonized the house, the person who platformed that doxxing was responsible. -
2019-04-10 at 8:50 PM UTCIt's not a crime to publish anything, even classified information. If it was, the Washington Post and the Hill and CNN would already be behind bars. If you get classified information, it's perfectly legal to publish it. The crime lies in the hacking of said classified information, not in the disseminating of it.
-
2019-04-10 at 9:39 PM UTCThere's also the fact that not a single coalition soldiers death has ever been attributable to the leak, not one. This really should be taken into consideration.the fact the us judicial won't when dealing with assange will speak volumes to their motives behind prosecuting him.
. -
2019-04-10 at 9:57 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL It's not a crime to publish anything, even classified information. If it was, the Washington Post and the Hill and CNN would already be behind bars. If you get classified information, it's perfectly legal to publish it. The crime lies in the hacking of said classified information, not in the disseminating of it.
Nobody is arguing from legality you fuck wit. -
2019-04-10 at 10:16 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 10:22 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 10:23 PM UTC
-
2019-04-10 at 10:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra The people who are capable of changing public opinion to make it acceptable to undermine the military will not do that because they know they're likely to be in power again someday and don't want to not have that tool at their disposal.
That explains why pretty much every American politician will line up to shit on whistleblowers, sure. We have a long proud history of bipartisan cooperation in defense of the MIC. But it doesn't explain why t2k1 and generally voters who support isolationist policy, who will never have the US military at their disposal, still condemn actions that could compromise US military efficacy. As far as I can tell it's just sentimentalism for troops. -
2019-04-10 at 10:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny That explains why pretty much every American politician will line up to shit on whistleblowers, sure. We have a long proud history of bipartisan cooperation in defense of the MIC. But it doesn't explain why t2k1 and generally voters who support isolationist policy, who will never have the US military at their disposal, still condemn actions that could compromise US military efficacy. As far as I can tell it's just sentimentalism for troops.
It's not just about their efficacy lmao, actual people could die. It must be real easy to be typing this from your Fagbook in San Francisco slurping on a hot cum inferno latte from Stalinbucks. There's a responsible way to handle these leaks. That's why people send them to Wikileaks in the first place, there is an assumption that the information will be handled responsibly. -
2019-04-10 at 11:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Common De-mominator It's not just about their efficacy lmao, actual people could die. It must be real easy to be typing this from your Fagbook in San Francisco slurping on a hot cum inferno latte from Stalinbucks. There's a responsible way to handle these leaks. That's why people send them to Wikileaks in the first place, there is an assumption that the information will be handled responsibly.
Greedy elite fags sending troops into battle so they can make gains on their fucking portfolio means soldiers will die too. They should be held to the same standard. In fact more so coz they're motive is just disgusting personal greed. At least whistleblowers intentions are to bring these shitheads to account in the hopes it may somewhat curb their vile intentions in future. Who's the real traitors in this scenario?
.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-04-11 at 12:51 AM UTC
Originally posted by Common De-mominator It's not just about their efficacy lmao, actual people could die. It must be real easy to be typing this from your Fagbook in San Francisco slurping on a hot cum inferno latte from Stalinbucks. There's a responsible way to handle these leaks. That's why people send them to Wikileaks in the first place, there is an assumption that the information will be handled responsibly.
People are going to die regardless. The military is literally the "go kill people" division of our government. Military efficacy equates to people dying. If people who can be fairly characterized as foreign invaders and thugs of corporate interests are the ones that end up dying, well I'd prefer no one die but they're probably the better option. -
2019-04-11 at 2:31 AM UTC
