Slashdot Mirror
Sarah Palin 'Target WikiLeaks Like Taliban'
DMandPenfold writes "Sarah Palin, who is widely tipped as a possible Republican candidate for president in 2012, has said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down in the way armed forces are targeting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda." So that means we should spend billions of dollars and not catch him? Good plan.
First post!
There is more to science than physics!
www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
Thanks for your cutting edge, witty commentary.
She is unelectable, why the hell does the media pay so much attention to her? She has to be the most hated political figure in the US for the left/left leaning middle. The dumbest thing the republicans could possibly do is run her in 2012.
After 9 years of hunting Bin Laden.. Assange is safe from the US for a while!
Let's not all suck at the same time please
Trillions! and thousands of civilian deaths.
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Right or wrong, if you kill him becomes a martyr. What a surprise that Sarah Palin didn't think before she spoke.
You know who we have to blame for her, right?
John McCain. What the heck was the man thinking? If he'd picked his VP candidate with an eye to win, instead of just throwing a dart then we'd be far better off. Even though I wouldn't have wanted his hypocritical, principal betraying, lying ass in the Oval Office, at least with a decent VP we'd not have had the horror that is Sarah Palin inflicted on the nation at large. She'd just be some obscure Alaska Governor waiting for the snows to come in and counting all the oil money.
Curse you!
Very good interview done within the last few days. Why can't we have this guy running the country, not the bozo teams we get over and over?
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/11/30/noam_chomsky_wikileaks_cables_reveal_profound
But if you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide? Right? Right??? That's what the government keeps telling me!
Palin just lost my vote. I liked her because she managed to balance the budget in Alaska and is supposedly a supporter of the Constitution. With her support of trying to take down wikileaks, it indicates she is actually a supporter of ongoing government waste and corruption.
Government of the people, by the people, for the people should be completely transparent. Every dime should be able to be accounted for, and all bills before Congress should be made publicly available before they are voted on - not hidden the way Romney/Obamacare was.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
FAILmerican retardation at it's finest.
And you're worried that the leaks might make the world have a bad impression about you?
So much stupidity for a "developed country".
Who cares what Sarah Palin thinks? This isn't news, for anybody.
Gone!
And then I voted for him in 2008.....things change. Still, I agree, she's pretty much unelectable in my mind.
The Taliban is responsible, directly and demonstrably, for a great many deaths, both in the US and abroad.
The number of deaths that can be traced to Assange is... how many? How indirectly?
If he is in fact guilty of the actual physical crimes of which he's accused, he should be pursued and prosecuted proportionally to them. But when you equate "taking America down a peg" with mass murder... it makes you realize why Assange is doing what he's doing.
It feels as if America has lost its glory, pursuing its reputation like a bully. I think we're still better than that. But the last election didn't tell me so as clearly as I'd like, and the next election may explicitly contradict me.
Nothing says "land of the free, home of the brave" than a quitter comparing a journalistic outfit that leaks embarassing data that the US and others don't want to be revealed to a theocratic government that opposes most fundamental freedoms. And yet, her base will eat this up.
My Sysadmin Blog
This is the best thing we could do. It means that the governments will attack unrelated targets, and Wikileaks will remain unscathed. He will be safe to do as he pleased and post other materials. Now if he Palin were going after him like he was Obama, then there might be some worry. But even then she would probably endorse some wako for the job who be so distracted with the Aqua Buddha, or who was doing what in the privacy of their own home, or would mistakenly travel to Sweden instead of Switzerland, or not realize that US laws did not apply in Europe.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Sarah Palin's commentary on anything deeper than an Alaskan salmon stream is wasted air. She is not a political mind worthy of quoting. I'd be more interested in Britney Spears commentary on the escalating North Korea situation since we might at least get some good cleavage pics.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
I bet there's a decent percentage of people-power being thrown at finding the guy and bringing him to a US-friendly court in a way that doesn't make it look like a CIA snatch-and-grab.
Don't believe anything I say. I crash test crack pipes for a living.
Keep her in the spotlight. I'd prefer having 4 more years of Obama, instead of any Republican "small government" type.
Taco, you should be ashamed for posting this obviouls flamebait article to drum up the clicks and flamewars.
Sarah Palin isn't a politician currently, and her opinion on this issue does not matter. So why even post this here?
Obviously, you want to continue to get the pagehits goings, but its obvious there is no value or substance that should be on this site.
The problem with both parties is that we can't keep the dumbest 2% of us off the television.
"Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
I haven't figured out all the blame is trying to focus on Wikileaks/Assange. To the point where people are being polled on if Assange should be charged with treason. I'm almost certain you need to be a US citizen before you can be charged with treason against the US.... Further, Assange didn't sign any agreements with the US gov't that he wouldn't release their information, that was the original informant. The information isn't (or shouldn't be) copyrighted, so the only thing to prevent anyone from distributing it is signing what is essentially an NDA.
Why do you hate freedom so much? Is fascism and secret policies really what you want for us?
Go ahead, bitch, refudiate me.
The layer of obfuscation sickens me. Media controls so many people and they are so busy debating on non-topics that the real issues are never even touched. Put a new target on TV and tell people they are bad. Masses buy into it and then the population is directed how they want. This place is ripe for revolution. Nothing today seems to be the way the founding fathers intended. I think they'd be very upset with the state of things.
Sarah Palin, who is widely tipped as a possible Republican candidate for president in 2012, has said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down in the way armed forces are targeting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
But luckily, Julian Assange watched her reality show, and decided to keep his hairy ass out of Alaska . . .
Hell, I can't really remember . . . are the tactical shotguns for shooting bears or salmon . . . I guess it don't matter . . .
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Still giving a fuck what a borderline moron has to say.
Remember? And the Tea Party dipshits hadn't even gotten started then. If you don't think this clown is electable, you haven't spent enough time in the flyover states.
Sent from the iPad I found in your car.
Please enjoy the upcoming Wikileaks of YOUR CABLES to Huckabee !
Slut !
Yours In Novosibirsk,
Kilgore T.
if the US were to send armed forces roaming our countryside looking for him.. Not to mention the great success the US have had in capturing Bin Ladin (or did you just give up on him, I can't recall)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I just saw a headline teaser on the TV that suggested that the Interpol alert on Assange has been lifted. Perhaps someone at Interpol was finally clued in that Assange was not the sort of person they are supposed to be looking for?
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Correction: a winkin' smiley
You never expect irony, do you?
Want to be a professional wrestler? Visit www.iyfwrestling.com
@iyfwrestling
I voted for Bush in 2004. I would have voted for him in 2000 if I was old enough. Voted for McCain in 2008. Never voted Democrat in my life. But if the Republicans nominate Palin in 2012, I will vote Obama. I don't like what he's doing to this country. He's given way too much power to unions (GM) and unfairly redistributing wealth (healthcare). But the damage he can do is minuscule when compared to what Palin would do. There is only one possible benefit I can see of Palin getting elected, and the is the complete dismantlement of the Republican party as we know it. Maybe we can finally get a party that is center-right, instead of overrun with right-wing radicals and religious nutjobs.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Does anyone -seriously- think that if Assange were locked up / killed / whatever, that this sort of thing would stop?
While he's more than "just a public face" in this issue, it isn't like Wikileaks would die with him, or that some successor wouldn't be spawned.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
What she and her supporters have not figured out is that they get so much attention because it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion. It's entertainment not politics.
Well, to her credit, she has a lot of followers. Despite many faux pas she's made that would have left anyone else gelded, she somehow keeps drumming up support. I'm not too educated on the numbers now for tea partiers versus non-tea partying Republicans but I think it would be a deathly schism for the Republican party. The two large parties can't afford to break off into chunks and therefore it's going to be the most supported candidate that gets the nod. Right now, who else is there?
There have been countless stupid quotes and moves by Sarah Palin where I've thought "Wow, well, at least she's finally done for." And yet she comes out of it. She starts working for Fox News and injects her own little two cents into everything and I'm thinking, "Look at all this material for a potential opponent to use against her." Yet she grows in popularity! She gets a reality show on some cable TV show called "Sarah Palin's Alaska" (like she owns the state) and I think "Well, finally, she's jumping the shark." Yet people are watching it in respectable TV viewing numbers! She releases a book that rips apart JFK and yet somehow she comes out still being followed. What gives?
In my humble opinion, as someone coming from the rural mid-west and now living in the urban east coast, you are talking about a populace you don't understand. People are watching her, reading her books and identifying with her at an alarming rate. To claim that everyone one of her supporters is driving from Ohio and other states to see her and Glenn Beck on the mall just to 'observe a train wreck' only exacerbates the problem and further removes you from what's really going on. America is just as polarized as they were during the elections and the Republican party -- though strong -- is encountering a weird kind of fragmentation for better or for worse.
Politics is entertainment just like sports are entertainment. But most spectators are cheering for someone.
It's easy for us to dismiss them but that only adds to their persecution complex. I don't know what the answer is but I prefer to listen to them and then try to reason with them instead of writing them off. There's bigger numbers in different parts of the country and I'm not a fan of watching Glenn Beck prey on people who are suffering right now. It downright sickens me.
My work here is dung.
Why do we give this person a platform to speak? We should just all ignore her and move on.
Maybe Sweden and other countries where WIkileaks have a presence should pre-emptively "target" Palin for threatening the invasion on their countries by US forces. She's CLEARLY a terrorist, no?
Sarah Palin assumes communist regime is US ally. If you vote for Palin and republicans, you're voting for communists!
There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
... like a moose
The world is how you make it
I hope for your sake America, that the biting analysis and smart analogies I've read here is replicated in your national newspapers for the masses to digest.
Jonathanjk.com
>"Sarah Palin ... has said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down in the way armed forces are targeting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda."
So does this mean the US is going to invade Venezuela?
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
The funny thing is, if Palin should ever become a president or not, vice or no vice, I'll definitely look into learning to pray. I guess Palin would approve ..
Hey don't blame me, IANAB
should just be labeled "flame bait".
.
.
.
.
Is it ratings time again already?
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
She is unelectable, why the hell does the media pay so much attention to her?
Because like her or not, people are attracted to news stories about her. Therefore she generates readers/viewers and in turn revenue. You yourself were attracted to a story about her.
To answer your question: even if unelectable she will be able to steer the debate, force certain topics to be discussed. Many an unelectable candidate thought such influence justified their campaign. Also, with enough followers she may be able to influence viable candidates, basically act as a "king maker".
You know, it's things like that that tend to set me off. Open information is essential to freedom, and the US found it quite delightful when WL exposed other countries. But now that it's coming to light that our own country has a lot to hide, it must be stopped? I don't think so. Get the information out there, shame the ones knowingly acting dishonestly and work to let them know it is not acceptable. People in power are always willing to bend the rules for what they feel is 'good reason'. Problem is, that so called good reason tends to expand quickly. I don't know what the fix is for the situation, but I do know that it will involve a lot more sites like WL. If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear. Or so the government tells us. Interesting how that doesn't seem to go both ways, that needs to change, in a big way.
Question reality.
I continue to wonder who still takes Sara Palin seriously. She's a painted up china doll paraded in the face of the American public in hopes that the sheeple will look at her while the puppeteers are busy further ruining our democracy.
...this one is not fake. People have actually seen him on the street.
On the other site: WTF is wrong with you, USA people? Targeting a man just because he released some documents showing how bad mouthing everyone in the world is with each other? I bet you can do better with the resources you'd put into that.
Cheers!
But there are those that are in power (already elected) who feel the same way. Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.), the incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee wants to classify wikileaks as a terrorist organization.. I believe that this would make contributing money a federal felony. In addition, the Interpol connection has been ratcheted up. Assange is now on the most wanted list.
It's not just Sarah Palin, there are those in power that are clearly using their power on this matter. Kind of scary, actually. (Though not surprising, considering what Assange is doing).
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
Does anyone else think that Sarah Palin is completely worthless?
One is just that it is kinda funny to hear crazies talk. I mean let's face it, she is nuts and she says some amazingly stupid shit. It can be amusing to read that. So that is part of it is people just going "What? She REALLY said that? Hell we need to print that shit!"
The other is that there are more than a few democrats who really, REALLY want her to be a forerunner in the republican party. Reason is of course that she is crazy and has basically no chance. Now realistically she isn't going to be a Republican contender. However the Democrats sure hope she is because man would that make for an easy election. That leads to more coverage than you'd normally get since not only is she trying to make herself heard, her opponents are trying to make sure she'd heard.
I guess Palin is jealous on him for having "blood on his hands” while she doesn't. I further guess she's doing all she can to change that.
I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
Why should we listen to screeches of a quitter?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I think Assange is a hero of the people, standing up like that to the fascists in power.
I hope that if he gets taken down, a billion other heroes will stand in his place.
He should be top dog in any of those dumb "vote for your hero" things that news sites like CNN tend to do, too!
This story is tagged both Palin and retard. Haven't those become synonyms already (my apologies to all the retards out there)?
What exactly does freedom have to do with releasing state secrets? It's never good to reveal the content of diplomatic communications, especially without any specific reason for doing so. Releasing the private communications means less diplomacy, and without making you think too hard, please tell me what happens when diplomacy fails!
So great job, we've now discovered though the release of these documents... well nothing really that we didn't already assume. We spy on our enemies at the U.N.? Well I should hope so! China is pissed at DPRK? Big surprise! Iran is fucking evil, who knew! And the cost? We have soured diplomacy as we know it and can use it less to prevent bloodshed! I don't care how much less we can use it, the fact stands that diplomacy as an enterprise to prevent bloodshed has been damaged and for what? So wiki leaks can have their name in the paper? Where is the crime that was being exposed by leaking these documents? So all you Monday morning quarterbacks who are trumpeting the release of these documents, don't forget that now we will move to war that much faster because diplomacy has been dealt a blow by your so-called "right to see state secrets".
Why not just seed rumors that Wikileaks will be releasing a substantial amount of Israeli intelligence and have Mossad do the job for you?
I can already see Sarah Palin dressed in a hunting outfit with a bolt-action rifle going after Mr. Assange just like a Moose in Alsaka. Maybe she will have him stuffed and mounted in her den next to the singing trout.
After 9 years of hunting Bin Laden.. Assange is safe from the US for a while!
But I don't now about US Army's external sub-contractors illegally arresting, detaining and torturing half of the Swedish population.
Nor the US Army overthrowing the government of Norway, on the grounds that they might have had supported Sweden and might also have servers for mass-hosting of leaks in possession (although independent reports from the UN deny both of these fears).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I think she means using UAV drones.
From the Daily Mash:
UNMANNED WIKILEAKS DRONE DESTROYS AFGHAN VILLAGE
"Because - and you might want to write this down and keep it somewhere safe - the key thing that has undermined the safety of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is them firing their big fucking guns at Iraqis and Afghans."
http://rocknerd.co.uk
What do you think she'd be doing with her life? Truck stop waitress?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
In the first big leak, the names of actual informants was leaked and it was reported one later died and a few disappeared. However, the actual impact on human lives because of this seems inconsequential or non-existent since there has been nothing actually substantiated as a direct result in the media.
It seems to me that the only real damage is to the government's ego by exposing it's lack of security and it's dirty laundry. On the whole, Wikileaks is doing the public a service by making the government take a hard look at it's security protocol. As for the information leaked, what's been the real impact in regards to national security concerns? So far, I don't see how the leaks have jeopardized our military efforts or global standings.
You get that Alaska's budget is balanced thanks to huge oil revenues and a small population and given that the state needs to GIVE the money away just to not appear too self-interested that her "work" as governor has NOTHING to do with it, right?
You are literally correct but essentially mistaken? Prior to being governor wasn't she some kind of oil commissioner and negotiated fees/taxes/payments made by the oil companies? If so she did have something to do with Alaska's windfall.
I'm a republican, and that is by far the most stupid thing to come out of her mouth. Palin needs to get the hell back to Alaska and out of the lives of us in the inner states.
"They confiscated everything, even the stuff we didn't steal!"
There always have been good reasons for government secrecy. Exposing certain secrets really can cost lives, don't kid yourself. This was true during WWII, and during the revolutionary war, and it's still true today.
That said, it's also true that governments will keep secrets for the wrong reasons. But, I am not sure we should applaud every person who exposes secrets.
Disclosure: US military vet, and have worked for major defense contractors. Hold a current DoD secret clearance, and have held an SSBI top secret clearance.
Assange is a total twat, and it boggles my mind how he can do such a service to humanity with leaking of sensitive information that actually ends up showing whats really going on in government. When did government get the authority to keep its activities from the people? After all, the people are what made government.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
Sarah Palin is going to target Julian Assange? With what sweetheart? Your caribou hunting rifle? Somehow I don't think it has the range to reach the UK, or wherever he is sitting these days.
No, honestly Sarah, what in the hell does your statement mean? Are you going to commit troops and military resources to "get him?" How are you going to do that since you are not in charge of any executive branch of any government in the entire world? Or does your current employer (isn't it Fox News nowadays?) have it's own private army that you can summon up just as easily as dipping into the petty cash?
Here's an idea, Sweetheart, instead of all the political grandstanding about what you are going to do to some dude on the other side of the world, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually try to go after him yourself? You don't want to break a nail? You don't want to put in the money or effort of conducting a manhunt? Well neither do the rest of us, nor do the citizens of the rest of the world, nor do most members of the U.S. military from what I can gather. We are tired of you politico retards, whom seem so adept at living with your heads on a completely different plain of reality, committing our resources, time, and efforts to some wild goose-chases that don't seem to produce any results anyways (Where is that last guy we went on a manhunt for? What was his name again? Osama Bin Something?). Nah, if you're really so outraged at Assange, go do your dirty work yourself. The rest of us are sick and tired of shoveling the shit for you student-body president, prom queen, princes and princesses that seem to think world politics is a popularity contest and a game.
For the tl:dr crowd, "Sarah, you're a stuck up, dolled up, dumb shit that isn't fit to find the path for getting your head out of your ass, much less hunting down a man on the other side of the world."
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
I suspect that the Wiki-Leaks founder will meet with an untimly acceident at some point in the future. If he wants to live a long life he might want to go to the Swiss and turn himself in might extend his life expectancy. I for one would suffer not tears for this jerk.
Semper Fi Ronald Ausman USMC Ret
Pretty soon we'll hear that Iran is developing an AMD (Assange of Mass Dissemination). We have no choice but to invade.
Does diplomacy still need to be played out as a game of princes?
What the leaks have shown so far is that there is no compelling reason to keep analysis and meeting minutes secret in the first place. Most of it already makes the evening news in one form or another and the veil of secrecy only serves to leave a void of suspicion and paranoia that chattering voices can fill with nonsense. In a democracy, the ultimate judges of policy are the voting public - so should not the rule be "talk to our leaders, talk to all of us"? Is stability and democracy of the world really served in the long run by allowing friendly leaders to say one thing to "us" and another thing to their own people? Isn't that the root problem of a lot of the instability in the first place?
I'm not expecting change, but the leak feels like is a rare opportunity to debate if there might be a better way to build the very foundations of diplomacy.
In the past, candidates and candidate would be 's used to at least speak in the people's interest even if they intended something else. Nowadays, the openly and shamelessly appease the hands that are trying to suppress the people.
I think he meant to say "post turtle"
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I don't think anyone can argue that most of what makes the US government bad is a direct result of the ruling elite having too much money and too much power. With less money and less power, they wouldn't be able to cause as much destruction and injustice, whether home or abroad. History shows that as long as government has money and power in excess, destruction and injustice will result.
Whether you agree with his policies or not, Ron Paul wants to cut spending and cut political power, not increase it like 99% of all other politicians. Unless the runaway train of government is stopped, we WILL continue on the same exact path to yet even more destruction and injustice.
see its proof the parent was right how stupid americans are
I'm no Palin fan, but sometimes I wonder if you guys read the article before posting....
'Palin continued: “His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders?"'
Her point is that he went beyond whistleblowing. I don't see how that's any dumber that what some of you are posting here.
Instead of paying billions failing to catch Assange, pay some of that to Assange so that we can find out who's responsible for failing so hard at catching Bin Laden.
'course, there's a certain risk that this info would embarrass the GOP echelon, so let's not risk it. In the name of national security!
They're mostly obsessed with her for one reason that they dare not utter: she refused to abort her son when she discovered that he had Down's Syndrome. For a liberal, humans are just chattel, so if they have any sort of defect that makes them less productive then their life is worthless. Liberals are also obsessed with Sarah Palin because she dared to step out of the pre-scripted role that liberals have created for women and minorities. If you want to understand why liberals are obsessed with Sarah Palin, just take a look at how the media treats any member of a "protected" class (women, minorities, gays, jews) that dares to step off of the liberal ideological plantation.
That said, I agree that she's unelectable. She seems to be of average intelligence (yes, average. Many of you think far too highly of yourselves), and I would like to have a leader that is of superior intelligence. Obama doesn't fall into the latter category. In his case, white liberals in academia saw a promising, articulate young black man, and they basically kept telling him how great he was until they dragged him across the finish line.
If the US hunts Assange like Bin-Laden then he has nothing to worry about!
Visit my Forums?
I will give her one thing, she knows how to capitalize on an emerging trend. She has no viability, yet, of making it to the White House. I know quite a few independents who are starting to think "she has got to be better than what we have". I don't think she would succeed because too many are overly invested in seeing her fail or worse, suffer from PDS, the equivalent of the BDS that was prevalent a few years ago.
That she sparks such reaction from both sides of the aisle is her greatest asset, to herself and us. She has the ability to draw focus to events and issues that has rarely been seen. While many many like her or even some of the items she brings up, she is getting them discussed. I, like many others, think that the government is way beyond control, it certainly proves it when it cannot run anything close to a balanced budget. Both parties are dysfunctional. She has called them out. Hence their allies will do what is necessary to minimize the damage, which in politics that means character assassination. For all those who thinks she is a loon there are as many who think no better of Obama.
Its a given the Republicans, if they run her, by choice or force, will sink their chances in 2012. Yet we don't know what the next two years will bring. She has caused a lot of people to take an interest in politics and their government, something for which I thank her for. Too many people just brushed off critical thinking about their government and their politicians. Too many had no hope. The Tea Party (WHICH IS NOT HERS!) showed the even established politicians can still be taken down, even from within the party most attributed to the Tea Party. That alone is worth the price of bearing with her.
I hope that what she does end up being is a catalyst for people waking up and electing those who will change the system. When senior members of Congress starts to mean people with only two terms in the Senate for a few in the House then perhaps the parties will understand they are supposed to serve us, not the other way around
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
What's disturbing is that PBS News Hour reported 20%+ of people polled thinks she's presidential material.
The good news I guess is that over half of the people with "below average" intelligence still have enough sense to conclude she's totally a politically agitating airhead. God(s) help us if she gets elected...
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
that article was so biased it was ridiculous. It would be obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence what they were trying to do.
Sarah Palin Targets YOU!!!
...That's CNN's journalism: uncritically passing on one government claim after the next -- without any contradiction, challenge, or scrutiny. ...what would an overtly state-run media do differently? Absolutely nothing. ...the sole criticism of the Government allowed to be heard is that they haven't done enough to keep us all in the dark...
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/30/wikileaks/index.html
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
They way everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike, talk about Assange you'd think he actually broke into the State Department and stole these cables himself. Assange shouldn't be the main focus of this story. It should be how a PFC was given complete access to an entire database of every cable sent from 1966-2010, complete with the ability to save a complete copy of said database. Assuming these cables are really as damaging as a terrorist attack, as everyone seems to be implying, you'd think they'd take better measures to secure it. For the record, I don't think this leak is as important as anyone, including Assange, have hyped it to be. But if we take the State Department at their word, that people will die as the result of this leak and that our relations with other nations will be significantly damaged, then the responsibility lies with them for their lax and incompetent security procedures.
that would be the golden age of comedy in united states.
Read radical news here
It seems to me that if we should hunt him down for what he released then we should certainly hunt down all members of the media who have published stories detailing what it was he released. Personally, I haven't seen anything directly from Wiki-leaks, everything I've read has been from the national media (Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, etc etc). If we condemn him for releasing this information then what gives them the right to release and report the same information? I doubt 99% of the people who know anything about the released material didn't get it from him, but from a 'respected' third party source.
so good if I could donate to her PAC account with a negative amount - the first thing that stops me is I'm not merkin and don't reside there; oh well, I suppose I could just "go on a hunt with her" and twitch when I take my shot........
(capcha was "partriots")
That's an interesting theory. The problem is that the August 24, 2008 meeting with advisors at which Sarah Palin became the top choice to be McCain's running mate occurred several months after Clinton's conceded the race for the Democratic nomination and endorsed Barack Obama on June 7, 2008; the August 27 meeting at which she was offered the #2 spot on the ticket took place during the Democratic Convention, on the same day Barack Obama was formally nominated as the Democratic Party's candidate for the Presidency.
So, its historically indefensible to claim that the McCain campaign was nominating Palin in response to the perceived current strength of the Clinton campaign at the time.
It's more defensible to claim that they did it in response to the defeat of Hillary Clinton, in belief that that defeat might provide an opening to pick up some disappointed Clinton supporters that really were focussed on seeing a woman on the ticket. (I'm not saying this is true, or that, if true, it was a reasonable expectation on their part -- but its an argument I've heard that is certainly more plausible than the explanation that the choice was made because they thought the Clinton campaign was still going strong and that that is who they would have to face in the general.)
Actually, the Kennedy's in general and JFK in particular DESERVE to be ripped apart--but not for the vapid reasons that Sarah Palin's ghost writer came up with.
Look, I'm not here to turn this into some JFK and RFK and Ted Kennedy did all this horrible crap and killed a woman and got away with it and were womanizing nepotistic rich bastards ... all or or some of these things could be said. But what I was trying to say here was that nobody has ever run on that platform. You can write a book of dirt when you're done with politics but writing such a book before you become president is sort of like asking your future opponent if they'd like to have their way with you right now. I mean JFK, though flawed, was a hero to a lot of Americans. And his martyrdom was just icing on the cake. And to call into question one of his most loved and cherished speeches is more than ballsy, it's downright dangerous.
Sarah Palin is a new kind of political monster, unlike the ones I'm used to watching comfortably from my armchair. She's got a twitter feed that sports so many errors, she might actually be the person running it! From a classic Bush-esque prescriptive versus descriptive linguistics error to making accusations and weird religious remarks. It's a microblogging service! Look at what the rest of the politicians use it for: a paid staff techie is told what to put on it and what goes on it is only tepid words praising safe topics for that candidate to like. And those are usually reviewed seventy times before they go up. She has broken the rules of and committed fouls in politics many times and yet people embrace her.
All I wanted to say in my post was that from what I've seen of Sarah Palin, we should have stuck a fork in her long ago yet she remains. And why is that? Well, she's a dangerously well liked and amicable to a large part of the population that you are not familiar with. If she makes a mistake they seem to forgive her and say "I've made that mistake too." If she uses cracked logic or argument tactics long ago written off by academics, her followers just write off the academics. Trust me, as someone who's tried to reason with a supporter with some fairly simple debate analysis of Glenn Beck's logic, I can tell you that you don't want to approach this as some fancy pants intellectual telling them how dumb they are.
Don't confuse this with praise of Sarah Palin or defense of JFK. This is just me trying to warn people about how I see the situation at present. What happens when she runs for president and her opposition preys on some stupid social gaffe of hers? If it's any less than what she's already done, it's merely going to be ignored by or reinforce her supporter's commitment.
My work here is dung.
just saying...
Come the revolution, the Bourgeois, Capitalistic, "A PARKING STICKER HOLDERS", will be first against the wall!
Do a google image search for: palin fascism
This is going too far. If something happens to him, she will have blood on her hands.
So, what's your plan Commander Douchebag?
It was the Pentagon that failed to secure this material. I'd rather see it on wikileaks and know what is compromised than not know what some foreign intelligence agency has acquired. Wikileaks shows us the security holes we have while also showing us the scope of required damage control. Thanks to wikileaks for decoy work.
Palin had some of her email posted on wikileaks a while back but really she should have secured here account better since her password was guessed from publicly available information. The emails would have ended up in a tabloid if they had not gone to wikileaks. She is just confused I think.
hey, 'plans', like that are what keep the 'military-industrial complex' in "business" ... as warned by Eisenhower !
Sarah Palin's commentary on anything deeper than an Alaskan salmon stream is wasted air.
Actually prior to being picked as the VP nominee she was one of the people interviewed for a CNBC (a business/financial cable TV channel in the US) investigative report on oil policy. In her interview she offered useful commentary on that topic. I only recall this because I saw the show a couple of weeks before McCain picked her; I actually recognized her and at the time thought this could be an interesting choice given the debate over oil drilling. Well things certainly turned out to be interesting.
>After 9 years of hunting Bin Laden.. Assange is safe from the US for a while!
No useful purpose would be solved in capturing Bin Laden. It would probably cause calls for the "war on terror" to be over, and that would make lots of military spending go away. Can't have that. No, it is far far better to have that boogey man out there as an excuse to carry on.
Assange, on the other hand, is nothing but a loose cannon bringing public embarrassment to people in power.
His ass is toast.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Sure, she has a lot of followers, but that's because we have a big electorate. In percentage terms, her numbers ain't so hot. The latest number I saw was "unfavorable" of around 38% and "favorable" less than 25%, with lots of undecided, don't know enough to say, etc. And with so much negative material available, you can bet that in the heat of a campaign, the balance would likely tip even further against her.
The tricky part is that her numbers are highly skewed by party - potential GOP voters like her a lot better than the electorate at large (at this stage of the game they haven't figured out likely voter models yet, so these are registered voter numbers). We could end up in a situation where she manages a victory in the Republican primaries on the strength of tea-party votes, but then gets crushed in the general.
t. Every dime should be able to be accounted for, and all bills before Congress should be made publicly available before they are voted on - not hidden the way Romney/Obamacare was.
yeah cause we dont list out all our bills anywhere for the people to read.....buy a clue...all bills are listed for ANYONE to read prior to them being voted on.
She should be president.
Let us not forget this quote: "He acted stupidly..."
FYI - Palin didn't say this.
This article is written in such a biased manner that it makes me ill.
Palin's goals are summed up by my favorite demotivator.
"Consulting: Because if you're not part of the solution, there's good money in prolonging the problem."
She very quickly / shrewdly realized that sitting on the sidelines jabbering away about "what's wrong with America" is an *insanely* profitable career. A career where your decisions can never be proven wrong. (Obama can make the wrong decisions, but Palin, Moore, Limbaugh, et al. never have that problem because they just offer *opinions* about decisions someone else makes.)
In short, she's exactly where she belongs and I wonder if she's smart enough to know it. Armchair Quarterbacks never, ever, ever get sacked. The only truly stupid thing could do would be to actually run for office again.
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
She should be hunted down the way we went after the rest of the fascists in 1945.
not al-qaeda and the taliban.
that means we should go after them, do some damage but never actually catch/destroy wikileaks, make it more popular with "commonfolk" in poor parts of the world, and kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process.
then, in a few years, wikileaks can release the wikigate docs, revealing the staggering civilian death toll caused by US troops in the quest to bring down julian assange and wikileaks.
we could probably tap the defense industry for some high-dollar, high-tech, high-fail-rate crap. and we probably need more security on the internet anyway, to combat the growing threat that wikileaks poses to the american way of life.
not only is time travel possible, it's irrelevant.
I'm pretty sure that the Constitution does not allow for the government to assassinate people with trial, for example. I'm pretty sure that she doesn't even understand the Constitution well enough to decide whether her beliefs are in accordance with it.
Ms Palin should pit a quarter slot in her ear,
so every time you put a quarter in,
she says something stupid.
WAIT, we have been getting so many freebee's lately.
You're like a 3 year old, doing and saying anything to get that camera.
I think a better use of US funds would be to staple your big mouth shut, as it's far more dangerous that wikileaks.
A university professor who is the ex-advisor for the Canadian Prime Minister also advocated the assassination of Julian Assange. He later "regretted" the remark.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
Who cares what Palin thinks?
The idea of US and other governments making up charges against Assange because they don't like him broadcasting information **others** have leaked is the very basis of thuggery and lawlessness. In the US noone is supposed to be above the law including the government and the rumblings to the contrary are worse than the sum of everything ever leaked by Wikileaks.
Interviews with people waiting for her book signing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKKKgua7wQk
Let me present to you a little scenario. You are in a room with 100 people. Two people in the room are "influential". The room is on fire and they are trying to figure out the best way to escape. One "leader" is intelligent but not very vocal or devious. He's all about facts and logic and he presents the best plan to escape the room. The other, she is all about being loud, using logical fallacies, and baffle-gook that sounds persuasive if you don't think too deep about it.
So each presents their case and leaves it up to a vote as to which plan is enacted.
Now here's the scary part... you have 98 people deciding the vote. If a majority of them are too stupid to think critically and understand the plans properly they just might vote for the plan that kills them.
That's my long winded way of say to not dismiss Palin too easily. If the stupid out-number the intelligent, it is absolutely possible for her to end up as president, especially with people stupid enough to just vote based on party affiliation and nothing else. Think about this, aren't intelligent people in a minority already?
It scares the hell out of me that she could actually be president. She's one big bag of retard and yet people listen to her!
Might be the time to get the fuck out of the country and never look back. We're the worst of what the world has to offer these days.
.. that if the US were to target Assange in this way that he's living next door to Palin when the drone orders in the strike. We could take sollace in his death if the collateral damage took out this deeply stupid and offensive woman at the same time.
One was to solidify the hard righty base. They were NOT happy with McCain as a candidate since he is (or perhaps more accurately was) a more moderate Republican, and not a fundy. They had convinced themselves that the Democrats were a has been party (funny enough just like the Democrats did about the Republicans before the last election) and that they could have their crazy fundy candidate. Well that didn't happen, a larger, more moderate group spoke p and McCain got the ticket. Ok so the hard core fundy-righties would never vote for a Democrat, but they might just decide not to vote. Her as a running mate made them happy and ensured they'd turn out to the pools.
Then there was the diversity issue. Obama had that in spades, obviously, McCain did not. Each of their VPs were selected to shore up their political weaknesses so to speak. In Obama's case he wasn't an old, established, insider white guy. Hence Biden, a guy as entrenched in the system as they come. McCain, being that already, needed diversity. So an attractive, younger, female running mate. In the beginning, it seemed like a great idea and garnered the kind of attention he wanted (till she opened her mouth).
Final reason was to woo Hillary supporters. There were a lot of feminist types that were FURIOUS that Obama won the primary. Their main issue was women in positions of power, not any particular ideology. So Palin was a way to woo them over. Again it seemed to work at first, she had a lot of support and defense against attacks about inexperience and so on from them.
They mistake McCain's campaign made was that she didn't stay a non-entity. Normally VPs really are not much in the way of news. You hear about them as a nomination, they say a few word in support of the candidate a few times and that is it. They just aren't something the media focuses on. Even when they do some silly shit it doesn't matter much. Remember Dan Quayle? Had that been the case with Palin, then nobody would really have been made aware of her views. She'd just have been a pretty face to help McCain get elected.
McCain and company either did not know just how batshit loony Palin was, figured that she could keep her mouth shut so it wouldn't be an issue, or that the media just wouldn't care. Whatever the reasons they were wrong, and she got a lot of focus, and it cost his campaign dearly in the long run.
However there were strong strategic reasons to nominate her, they just miscalculated on the damage her level of crazy would cause.
Bush was appointed to the Presidency in 2000 by the SCOTUS.
Bush was elected to the Presidency in 2004 by the Electorate College.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
I'm nobody! Who are you?
Are you nobody, too?
Then there's a pair of us -- don't tell!
They'd banish us, you know.
How dreary to be somebody!
How public, like a frog
To tell your name the livelong day
To an admiring bog!
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
You have no party of the left.
Your Democrats have some allies elsewhere. Here in the UK, our Conservatives seem to like them.
BTW - Brisish Conservatives are accused of being the most extreme major party in Europe. They are regularly seen as the "Nasty Party".
"Liberal" means middle of the road. Anyone who regards the middle as way to their left must be a long way right of the centre.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
She wrote: “Assange is not a 'journalist', any more than the 'editor' of al-Qaeda's new English-language magazine Inspire is a 'journalist'." But in a 2008 US television interview with presenter Katie Couric, Palin herself appeared unable to name the newspapers she reads.
Did anyone else notice this non sequitur in the article? What do her views on Assange's journalistic credentials have to do with her ability to name the newspapers she reads?
I'm no fan of Palin, but what the hell is this garbage?
But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
Seriously. She quit her job as governor. Who wants a quitter in the White House?
The Dem's are holding back. They have plenty to use in campaigns against her if she does get the nomination (which may be why Big Media loves her), but expect to see other GOP candidates seeking nomination to use it first.
-- Alastair
The number of deaths that can be traced to Assange is... how many? How indirectly?
This makes me think of a hot topic that has been a bit more prevalent lately: that of file-sharing and the subsequent legal implications. Whatever happened to "don't kill the messenger"? But it really isn't just that, it is the finger-pointing that really gets me today.
...
Several years ago, if you had asked me if I cared about nuts like Sarah Palin, net neutrality, and other issues involving basic fundamental liberties, I would have answered: "those topics annoy me but I do not feel extremely passionate towards any of the issues". Having one side (mother's) of my family exhibit a strong Christian foundation during my youth, they always would look at skeptics and call them fanatics, liberals and call them atheists, and other terms I usually ignored.
But I believe anyone who has any sort of moral code will be compelled, due the very nature of his or her character, after seeing countless acts of insanity from humanity, to act or become passionate on issues. People say "I don't vote because it won't matter." I used to be that way. But now I see even if my vote or opinion is one in a million or even on the losing side, "restoring sanity" and voting is no longer just a civil obligation, but rather a moral obligation: if Sarah Palin wins any sort of election for presidency and I did not vote for an opposing party, I will have trouble sleeping at night.
It feels as if America has lost its glory, pursuing its reputation like a bully. I think we're still better than that. But the last election didn't tell me so as clearly as I'd like, and the next election may explicitly contradict me.
We're better than that because we expose and actively pursue the lunatics and borderline mentally insane and protest social injustice. We are better than that because the majority or even "large enough percentage" of the population holds pride to their neglect of ignorant thought. I love free thought and I am fascinated by the idea of globalization... but just like the side-effect of a drug, if I can say something stupid so can another individual. And who knows if his or her stupid idea has enough backing, it could become a concept. It is to this end I have learned that there will always be idiots and it is our moral duty to ensure that they do not write all the history books.
We're still better than that because there are people still who know better and have at least a chance to better the whole. (Sorry for the long read haha, just hyperbolic politics today tend to ignite long discussion board posts...)
cheers
We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
Why worry? Sweden wants him in regard to a sexual assault; let Interpol handle it. He'll turn up eventually.
In America today you can murder land for private profit. You can leave the corpse for all to see, and nobody calls the c
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Oe7ul3c8tYc/SicX8rVT_YI/AAAAAAAAAg8/APvQB3vZW2U/s1600-h/roadside-pv-6.jpg
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Sarah Palin is an stupid moron. News at 11.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Seriously, I hope /. is getting advertising funds from WikiLeaks. Is there really nothing else important enough that we have to see five articles on them?
Just another day in Paradise
This is the last place I'd see "news" about that half-baked politician who doesn't have the 3 brain cells she was born with. It's a good thing slashdot let me remove the "Politics" category just now, or our long relationship would be at an end.
he still thinks an economic life without any rules and regulations can be real. whereas this is actually similar to abolishing all courts of law, judiciary, and laws, and then saying 'people will regulate themselves', in social life.
Read radical news here
How about target Sarah Palin like the Talaban ? For sure she can do more damage to America than the Talaban (just like Bush)
So that means we should spend billions of dollars and not catch him? Good plan.
Know what? Fuck you, Taco. I don't see you stepping up to the plate.
They ought to do the same thing to spammers that they've done to the diplomats. Why doesn't someone post the emails the spammers are sending around? It's about time someone put those bastards in their place.
It's interesting that there's more pissing and moaning about Palin than there is about whether or not Assange should be pursued like the Taliban.
if shara palin beomes president the world as we know it will end.
If any harm comes to Assange then I suspect the Commonwealth legal crowd would be delighted to extradite her as an accessory to a crime?
The only good thing is that she's been rejected once. McCain's number went up... then crashed when people learned that Palin is incompetent. I used to vote Republican most of the time, but I sure won't vote for her.
So I don't doubt that she'll run, but I think that she'll split the party enough that she won't get elected. God help us if she does, though.
Sounds like she's planning to invade Europe.
How else are you gonna hold the world governments accountable ? I just wish data that is of real concern gets intercepted. I'd like to see the way governments really operate exposed. I don't trust the World Bank, I don't trust the Wold Health Organization .. I'd like to see if the link to the Stone Masons to a secret underworld government exists.. check to see if the Illuminati link is there..
We gotta keep our governments honest. keep up the good work, and perhaps step it up a notch ?
the first thing we'll do is invade Wikipedia
Setting aside the accusations of rape in Sweden, what US law has Assange been accused of breaking?
In the current Wikileaks drama, it's interesting to note that Wikileaks has only presented the exact same documents with the same redactions as the New York Times, who has done so with the cooperation and informed consent of the State Department. As far as I know, he hasn't even been accused of a crime, and has certainly not been convicted of a crime that has a punishment consistent with what Ms. Palin is suggesting.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Some percentage of voters will vote for her as long as she always says, "I'm a Christian and I oppose abortion". One of my coworkers is like that. With Bush, someone else people said was, "At least he always did what he said he was going to do" even if this is not true. Some people like a simple, straightforward person, who they think is honest. She's a real life Forest Gump, with some heavy duty Americana, Christianity, and "we're always right" and "bomb the living hell out of them" mixed in. But I don't think she can win a primary, and I don't think she can beat Obama. They will tell her what to say, and give her a hidden wire for the debates, but I still think she will flub things. People ultimately concluded that Bush was not quite as dumb as he came across. With Palin, it's pretty obvious that she's an idiot. It reminds of Michigan, in 2006, Dick DeVos vs. Jennifer Granholm. People were really unhappy with Granholm but terrified of DeVos. The republican should have won. But because it was DeVos, Granholm actually won re-election. Of course, the rest of the country is not all like Michigan....
It's the cognitive equivalent of shouting because you have nothing to say worth listening to,or grabbing a bigger hammer when the small one won't drive the screw.
It's one rung on the ladder below the mentality that says things like "That's so crazy it might just work!" It confuses "drastic" with "vigorous ".
You can' even mock people who "think" this way because making of stupid people isn't politically correct. People feel sorry for them, like you're beating up an old lady in a wheelchair.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
And not even that. More like 49% of the folks who bothered to vote.
Which, in the case of Bush in 2000, actually equates to roughly 18% of all Americans.
So from this we can conclude that: 18% worship morons, slightly more than 18% can identify morons and just under 64% are morons for not voting in the first place.
Wow .. so that means we should "hunt" him down and 9 or 10 years later, after changing directions 50000 times and lying non-stop, still not have captured him?
Way to be a fascist, Sarah. You never were the brightest bulb on the string.
First of all .. wiki leaks is not the problem here ..
The problem that everyone seems to forget is that he/they "GOT THE DOCUMENTS IN THE FIRST PLACE" ..
If wiki leaks has access to "top secrete" or what was supposed to be secured documents .. Guess what , we did not do a very good job of securing them.
Having wiki leaks release them is not the idea situation .. Best would be for the documents to be returned without being made public.
But guess what , the simple fact that we can examine the docs and figure out how they were leaked ..
Hunting the man down is just stupid.
Has everyone in the government forgotten the simple concept of "root cause analysis"
Sarah Palin is a stupid bitch who should have never been allowed to leave the house. She is an accident that never should have happened, an accident her mother tried to remedy with asperin and coke (and it didn't work). She hasn't had 1 correct answer, 1 lucid sentence, 1 complete thought in her head in the last 10 years. How the Republicans can keep picking dumbfucks with IQ's below 40 over and over again is either intentional (puppets only need a head stuffed full of cow manure), or accidental (they don't want anyone brighter than themselves). Either way, the political right has become the land of circus sideshow freaks: bobo the dogfaced boy, and now the drooling monkeygirl. Oh, they are armed and angry, but not with half the lick of good sense God gave a housefly. I'm tired of giving these idiots a podium. They are idiots. Fucking mental retards. They shouldn't be in charge of anything more responsible than laundry, and I'd only let them have my laundry if it was old clothes.
Firstly, they said the EXACT same thing about Bob Dole, than ran him against Clinton, insuring that Clinton would win a second term to sign into law the Telecommunications, allowing for ever more super-concentration of the "media" (your term, definitely not mine as there is no media in the USA today), and to sign off on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, allowing for the absolute theft of the US Treasury and the American people, and the global meltdown still going on (as in Latvia, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Iceland, etc., and yes, they are all connected to the 1 to 2 plus quadrillion dollars worth of credit derivatives churned out by the banksters.
Clinton also appointed public enemy number one, billionaire leveraged buyout king, Peter G. Peterson (also known as Davy Rockefeller's boy), for the "end-welfare-as-we-know-it" commission, which made the year for Peterson, who has long strived to privatize Social Security, Medicare and Medicare and end all possibilities of any safety net, while doing leveraged buyouts on all companies to destroy them and their jobs, and offshoring all American jobs.
Now, it's no coincidence that one of Obama's first appointments was the notorious and nefarious jobs-offshoring queen, Diane Farrell (formerly with Goldman Sachs, still with McKinsey Global Institute, and the Bretton Woods Committee, etc.).
Dude, get with the program: there is no difference between one party or the other, they are ALL the bankster party, owned by the bank-oil cartel, and paid off to do their bidding. Every prez since Nixon on has been the banksters' choice.
What does Jimmy Carter keep repeating over and over again on his book tour?
"George H.W. Bush was the best qualified, most experienced president in my lifetime, and I have a great deal of respect for James Baker."
And who just awarded George H.W. Bush the Presidential Freedom Medal? (Hint: Barack Obama!)
Is this really the best the US can do? Someone who is thick as shit possibly running (and being elected) for POTUS? Seriously?
How far the mighty have fallen. 24x7 Fox News must be doing its job.
Brains, people - brains! There is nothing wrong (or weak or whatever is the derogatory term of the day) with using them. Stand up for your republic before it is too late.
(Yeah, I know, a bit melodramatic, but honestly, this woman receives far too much coverage for her own (and the worlds) good - quite frankly, it does my head in.)
Dood, Obama spent 12 years in the University of Chicago academia, as in the university that John D. Rockefeller built. The same academic system that vomited up Milton Friedman and Antonin Scalia.
Yes, hunt him down like Al Qaeda, because that went so well. Does the US have another $100billion to spend on finding him?
Can we stop this theatralics about the leaked cables? Seriously, with 3 million people having access to SIPRNET, does anyone seriously believe that any major power has not at least 10 informants in there who had access to this data all along? There is nothing in the leaked documents that is new to any major intelligence service. Now, that it has become public though, everyone has to go through the motions, posture, and show righteous indignation.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Here's what Loki has been up to, in the guise of women and Swedish prosecutors: http://www.abacus-news.co.uk/news/10/wikileaksconspiracy7.php http://rixstep.com/1/20100914,00.shtml http://rixstep.com/2/1/20101018,00.shtml http://radsoft.net/rants/20100905,00.shtml http://rixstep.com/1/20100917,00.shtml http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/16/army_wikileaks/ http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29320
Perhaps it escaped your attention, but Americans already (debatably) elected the dumbest lying finger puppet on the planet to preside over two terms of slow-motion disaster creation. Then they elected a smart guy to fix the dumb guy's mess but don't like the fact that they have help clean the dumb guy's mess up. So they'll be knee-jerking back to wanting to elect the dumbest lying clown anyone can find and so far Palin is her name.
First, some idiot republican congressman (I forgot his name unfortunately). Then some idiot canadian professor (who happens to be senior advisor to canadian PM). Now Sarah Palin. Lie repeated hundreds of times becomes a truth. It looks like preparing ground for Assange elimination, so I wonder if he makes it to the next leak.
Now it seems that next leak will target corruption in a big US bank. I'm curious what really make all those folks so amok: already leaked diplomatic cables or a future leak of a BANK (propably BoA). Assuming that banks retain nearly absolute control of all political systems of the West my bet is that they'll try to stop it at all costs. But maybe I'm wrong. Let's wait and see...
It's amazing the vitriol reserved only for a strong female social conservative Republican. I just want to thank you all for your participation. You may not think she's the sharpest knife; we're OK with that. You may think she's an idiot, unelectable, foolish, a fascist... we're OK with that too. The smugness and supposed intellectual superiority exuding from the trenches of Slashdot always amazes me. This one especially so. I'll enunciate why below:
;)
1] You believe that Assange is a hero of some sort.
While this may be the case if he were solely releasing secret information from tyrannical governments, he is more focused on damaging the credibility and security of nations in the west, most specifically the United States. In order to believe that this is good that he is releasing secret information during a war, you have to believe some of the following:
a) The United States (Administration/Government/Military) is corrupt and/or tyrannical and/or evil
b) The information released will harm no one just embarrass our elected officials in an almost amusing or chastising way
c) You disagree with the mission and therefore will support anything that can have an impact in arranging a retreat/redeployment/victory lap out of the engaged country
d) The information released will harm people but you don't care about those people because they're not your friends or political allies
e) You don't believe that there is such a thing as Treason or Espionage and that spies are just heroes in disguise in every instance (or just when they are targeting the west)
f) Only when engaged in Total War should we ever care about operational security.
2] You are deathly afraid of Sarah Palin
This one bemuses most conservatives and it's a prime reason as to why she's still around. We're not terribly keen on her abilities but we are keen on her ideology and her core fundamentals. Her voice is kind of obnoxious and she misspeaks now and then or she brain farts in front of the world. We know that. We're not oblivious. We acknowledge this and move past it because it's very superficial. You guys bought up your well packaged Perfect Man. Not quite the Perfect Man you thought he was, I'd imagine. What does resonate.. and tremendously so.. is her message.
What you don't understand is; the more you resist her the stronger she's going to get. Your inability to be civil.. to keep race and gender out of the equation.. to continue to use childish and personal attacks against her..just fuels her, because you see, she just mirrors you back to conservatives. *You* are Sarah Palin's fuel. Your injustice breeds this brand of politics. Conservatives outnumber you and every time they're shown by her what knuckle dragging comments come to her, they see the bias and jump your ship. You will see that if conservatives can not muster up a proper challenger, we may indeed have Sarah Palin in the running and she may indeed be victorious. She would not be our ideal candidate but she's definitely not your ideal candidate. We like that you think she's stupid because she's not.. you just think anyone that disagrees with your philosophy or view point is stupid. (By virtue of the logic of: Well, only an idiot could think my political point of view is wrong!) Such arrogance and pompous remarks fill this column. We like that you're afraid of her because we don't like your advocacy of tyranny against the individual by the majority, and what causes a tyrant to wake up in a cold sweat is something to attain. And you see, we'd do all we could to make it happen, just to humble you ivory tower elitists who say it's impossible or that she would be a terrible president because of anything, her proving you wrong, that certainly would. You've put all your eggs in one basket. A grave (and desperate) political strategy mistake. You can't fight Bush anymore.. lost to Fox News.. and need something to focus your rage on. We gave you something, good luck.
just how much vile and hatred there is towards her. Just look at the comments on here, most of them are half thought-out spews of emotion. I don't care who she is (for what it's worth, I wouldn't vote for her, yet I shouldn't have to say that to avoid flames...), letting your emotions run wild like that makes you look more crazy than she could ever be.
Seriously, grow up and stop letting your emotions rule your life. Nobody will take you seriously if the first words out of your mouth are always "OMG I HAAATE HER!!!".
He meant that the last time a write-in won a major election was just 18 years ago.
Wait, that's wrong too...I have no explanation for it.
I side with Palin most of the time and find the anti-Palin diatribe in the majority of the comments depressing. The mob on Slashdot is just like mobs everywhere. Now, while I don't side with Palin on this issue, because I have a small fondness for anarchy, she has a very legitimate position. When two people talk, they talk with a level of trust. Wikileaks shattered a lot of the mutual trust. People seem to think that everything government does should be out in the open. What foolishness. There is no perfect form of government. Assuming that having everything out in the open would work better is a long long shot. You just change one system of corruption for another.
Nor the US Army overthrowing the government of Norway
People might get the impression that the US was after the Norwegian North Sea oil in the first place...
I think we're missing the point here....I'd still do her.
The show must go on!...and every bullet shot comes from the people's taxes!....of course...is MUCH better short term investment to shot bullets and pay providers (and receive nice presents!) than to give education to the people...because, when they start understanding what's going on, they turn against the people in power! If Julian wants to shake the "power", he should publish Switzerland's and Luxembourg's banking statements. That's a guarantee of at least 10 or 15 revolutions around the globe.
It's not risky at all. Read the Alaska Department of Revenue's forecast report.
You are correct. Unlike other states Alaska does increase the tax as oil prices rise. But guess who is responsible for that, Palin:
"Under Palin's plan, called ``Alaska's Clear and Equitable Share,'' oil company profits are taxed at a 25 percent base rate, up from the previous 22.5 percent. When the price rises to $30 over cost, or about $52 a barrel, the tax rate rises 0.2 percent for each dollar."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aYdZoyTvFrTc&refer=home
Folks should flame her when she does something silly, but folks should also give her credit for things she got right.
Billions? Try Trillions. Theory -- The Mayans somehow knew that Sarah Palin will be elected President in November 2012, which is why their calendar ends in in December 2012.
When someone makes a move
Of which we don't approve,
Who is it that always intervenes?
U.N. and O.A.S.,
They have their place, I guess,
But first send the Marines!
We'll send them all we've got,
John Wayne and Randolph Scott,
Remember those exciting fighting scenes?
To the shores of Tripoli,
But not to Mississippoli,
What do we do? We send the Marines!
For might makes right,
And till they've seen the light,
They've got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
'Till somebody we like can be elected.
Members of the corps
All hate the thought of war,
They'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.
Stop calling it aggression,
O we hate that expression.
We only want the world to know
That we support the status quo.
They love us everywhere we go,
So when in doubt,
Send the Marines!
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
"Don't know 'bout yer, but dis president O-bama pisses me off! I found out dis president O-bama wants to put a bigger tax on gasoline. What's up with dat?! Dis is gay as hell!"
Thanks to South Park, US rednecks are known even outside US.
Can someone buy her a humain brain ? She's a Cylon.
Seriously, she is the political troll version of SCO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Public_Safety_Commissioner_dismissal
She stepped down not to campaign, but to duck legal troubles. She was in some serious hot water for abusing her powers as governor. She is a coward and a quitter, and sadly for you and her chances in politics, I'm solidly in the majority in that belief. She will continue to have a nice career as a pundit and media celebrity on Fox News, though, and like all spoiled princesses, fame is all she ever really wanted.
(Sorry, I just have to) Your mom's face is almost as much fun as MichaelKristopeit.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
She's such an incredibly incompetent, pathetic, stupid, worthless cunt... and yet.. unlike what people seem to think.. she might very well be electable. Remember Dubya stayed in office for two-terms after the elections were fixed in his favor.. could happen with the pathetic cunt as well.
Mr. A should start calling himself Ossama Bin Laden and hide out in Afghanistan, no one would ever find him!
is with Palin, please let her win the nomination. please please please please please please
Well then I nominate Sarah Palin....
It gives me another chance to publicize what those 'baseless' lawsuits were.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Public_Safety_Commissioner_dismissal
Read about the lawsuit and make up your own mind how 'baseless' they were.
Now thynk, aren't you glad you mentioned those 'baseless' lawsuits? Getting the truth out there feels pretty good, doesn't it?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Would like the republican party to give us our term back. It's OK to be republican, but it doesn't mean you are conservative, it just means you are a republican. the reason a lot of republicans use conservative is for the same reason Liberal has become a dirty word. There is nothing Conservative about warrantless wire taps, pro life stances, stem cell research restrictions, drug wars, price fixing, oil company subsidies, invasion of sovereign nations, torturing fellow humans, no bid military contracts, manufacturing evidence, outing CIA agents... obviously there are Conservative Republicans, but just becuase someone goes to church doesn't mean they're conservative, it means they are Christian. Sarah Palin is a Republican who is attractive, has a certain charisma, and is not very intelligent. Nothing particularly conservative that I can see
"...and all bills before Congress should be made publicly available before they are voted on - not hidden the way Romney/Obamacare was."
Seriously? I recall some Republican on Jon Stewarts show dropping a huge pile of paper on Stewarts desk and saying "I have the bill right here", and that was months before it was passed. And how did Palin know about the Death Panels if she never saw the bill?
Please, the "Obamacare was passed in secret" meme has to die, it's beyond stupid.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
Does this mean we will turn around and start a war with Wikipedia?
"Idiocracy" is the name of the movie. Live it. Breath it. Embrace it. Anyone up for lunch tomorrow at ButtFuckers? I'm buying...
What I don't get is how WikiLeaks is anymore a terrorist organization than a tabloid or newspaper or news cannel that airs government dirty laundry.
*tens of thousands* civilian deaths
.....as a lobotomy survivor. But she must never be permitted around children, sharp objects, or multi-syllable words.
what exactly did wikileaks do wrong, nothing I can think of. They are not part of the United States, they don't have to follow our laws Have we de-evolved as a country to attack anyone around the world who speaks anything bad about our country. Does this mean we should declare war on anyone or any country that ever gets their hands on evidence the us did something wrong or questionable and then reports on it.
Assanginate: v. to attempt to neutralize a person's message and effectiveness by means of character assassination, esp. involving sexual slanders or trumped up sex crime charges.
Assangination: n. the act of having one's character assassinated in the manner purported to be done to Julian Assange, a prominent peace activist and opponent of unethical and abusive government authority.
My point was that Bush was Elected in 2004, he wasn't RE-Elected in 2004.
Clinton was elected in 1992, and re-elected in 1996. Reagan was elected in 1980, and re-elected in 1984.
Bush Jr was only elected once. His initial term as POTUS was delivered by the SCOTUS, not the electoral college.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
> So that means we should spend billions of dollars and not catch him? Good plan.
Sure.
Otherwise one wouldn't be able to justify the spending of billions needed to feed those consumer zombies that make youtube videos that show nothing more than the _unboxing_ of their newest gadget.
Or otherwise the rest of the world would laugh their *ss off, when somebody comparing the increase in spending to sustain californian agriculture to a BIP that is in great parts nothing more than expenses for war and more than 800billion(!!!) of lawyer "service" -- that's one big pile of h*t air, but don't tell the investors! -- and still finds its way to hacker news to impress... well, impress who?
And, as I look at my government, I have to disagree. Unfortunately.
I can't believe you're going making me defend Sarah Palin, but the OP is misquoting her.
What she actually said was, "Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders? [emphasis added]". She then goes on to say "Were individuals working for Wikileaks on these document leaks investigated? Shouldn’t they at least have had their financial assets frozen". It's clear she's advocating a legal response, not a military one.
Except that Bush WAS elected by the Electoral College. The only thing SCOTUS did was to rule that the selective recount process in Florida, as well as the post-election modification of Florida election laws, was unconstitutional. Therefore, the electoral votes of Florida were awarded based upon the results certified according to Florida law.
Congress certified the electoral votes on January 6, 2001. Objections that were filed at that time by House members (22 of them) were overruled by Al Gore as being out of order.
There's a reason why they haven't captured terrorists.... The pentagon runs them....
Palin is in effect stating that we should be able to treat citizens w/o due process of law as prescribed in the constitution...
And then you realize that neither party wants to repeal the Patriot act....
All the world is a stage .... while we are distracted by a bimbo w/ high heels running for president, and yet, no one I know thinks she is electable .... and the 'free' press continues to promote her...
Its time to wake up.....
of the republican elector's stupidity
I should have added: You're right -- I did miss part of your point in that I thought you were implying that he wasn't elected at all. Sorry for the wrong inference.
Sarah Palin is a non-issue. Until she decides to get off the fence, we don't give a shit about her anymore than anybody else.
If she's brain dead enough to decide she want's the job, then she'd better be prepared to have NO SECRETS.
Go Julian Assange.
You're like a glove the TSA uses.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
....By completely ignoring her.
We experienced a 'first' with the election of President Obama. -Nobody really wanted the job at this time. At the next election, will our situation be any brighter ? - Someone will still be there to run for election. . . .
I hear people say that Sarah Palin does not fit in, is weird, does not do the 'right' thing, does not have the 'right' (or in this case, left) opinion. And alarmingly, there is a large number of people across the US who seem to identify with her, like her and will vote for her.
Does this sound like a familiar pattern to the people in the open source community??
O this learning! What a thing it is - William Shakespeare
Wikileaks would be slammed by everyone if the leaks weren't edited - remember Amnesty International's response to the war logs? I don't like some of his practices any more than you do, but it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation with editing the leaks - if it isn't edited, then you could be actually endangering lives. If it is, then you get slammed for pushing your own agenda.
I know that wikileaks has it's own adgenda, but so does everybody. In cases like the "collateral murder" video, the spin put on it was a bit much. But the original, full-length video was also available for anyone who didn't want to see the annotated and edited version.
That said, I do agree that the trickle of leaks is irresponsible - it does seem to be purely to piss off the US Government, something that should be a side affect of Wikileak's work rather than a deliberate act.
Our culture doesn't get smarter, it just finds new ways of being retarded.
We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
Principally because the distraction of the former covers the evil of the latter... (cf. Bush & Cheney)
Anyone can put a hooker in a suit, slap some glasses on her, and have an instant political rival to Sarah Palin.
The fact nobody hasn't yet, stymies me.
To make illegal dead threats publicly and with total impunity.
And get more votes just because of that.
Conservative mindset, I love you so much.
AFAIK, neither the Talibans nor Al-Qaeda have been eliminated or beaten. Palin being the intelligent person she is, is just supporting Wikileaks, knowing they will never be able to hunt them down efficiently.
Sorry but I think that your claim the be highly educated is false. Kindergarden does NOT count as higher education even if you stayed in it till 18.
So basically you want the guy that says "Oh, you Chinese claim you are our friends, well sure you can buy our army for a buck, anything for a friend" as your nations leader.
It sure as hell explains a LOT.
Hate to break it to you, but unless rocks can stand for president, we can't find anything dumber then you to run the country. Or is that your plan? Show to more stupid then Palin and get elected?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
our world is run by mentally challenged people voted by mentally challenged people, money and violence.
“When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”
America is a lie. Always has been, always will be. Land of the free. Except for the niggers, the kikes, the chinks, women. One man one vote? Not in the US of A of the founding fathers.
There is currently a BBC documentary running that has as one of the tales about the lie of the American Dream and negro pilot who flew for the US in WW2, shot down and made prisoner he had more rights as a black officer in nazi germany then as a black man in the US for a very long time after WW2.
THIS is the real USA, were a black doctor was refused a blood transfusion because of his color. THIS is the America of Sarah Palin. A bigoted nation in which more states allow marriage between first cousins then between members of the same sex. Where blacks can still be shot by the police without consequence. A nation whose appetite for drugs is causing civil war in a neighbouring country but drugs are not dealt with other then creating the largest prison population.
It is a country in which lack of control causing a bank collapse, industry collapse, housing collapse and a oil disaster, so the popular vote is for LESS government control. Whoo!
The US is fundementally a country in which the American Dream has such an appeal that rational thought has no place. The fact is that governments ain't sexy, efficient or cheap. You can't run a country on a wish because you can never control the rest of the world enough to stop them interfering with your plans. America HAD been withdrawing from the world stage pre-9/11 then a dozen Muslims changed the world stage and the US had to shelve any budget cuts to the armed forces it might have used to pay for the lack of banking/housing oversight.
There is another story on Slashdot, the selling of HMS Invinceble that shows just how hard it is to run a country with any sort of ideology. The carrier wasn't meant to be used this long, it was for sale to the Aussies. Then Argentine invaded the Falklands and British plans had to be changed.
In Holland a move is being made to raise the speed limit in some areas to 130 kilometers per hour. Nobody is in favor except the kind of people that support Sarah Palin. It is an environmental disaster, the will cause a lot of confusion, the sections it can even be done on are tiny and it will kill an additional 13 people per year. Holland is a tiny country and our highway system is basically one long on/off ramp. Traffic constantly weaves from lane to lane, but now with an even high speed difference. The sections it is proposed to raise the speed limit on often have traffic jams making a higher speed pointless. BUT it is the only thing they can do, because everything else is bogged down in procedure. They want to show they are having an effect and so come up with a plan has a negative effect just to show they can do something.
Sarah Palin does the same. She can't fight the Taliban, can't change the economy, can't revitalize American industry, so lets make a pull on the old patriotic heartstrings and we all sing the anthem as the USS America sinks beneath the waves.
In times of crisis we need smart leaders who do what is right, not popular. And the only way to get them is with a popularity contest.
Thank you so very very much Greek. Democracy, never meant for the common man (Meaning everyone who doesn't agree with me).
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
A man was found in a the remote jungle of New Guinea who actually cared what Palin had to say. Scientists are studying this hitherto unknown phenomenon and hope to soon discover why the world media views him as their central audience, as he doesn't have a television and can't read.
Here's Tom with the weather
Get rid of the army, then. Sack all the armed forces. The fed has no constitutional responsibility to pay for one. It's supposed to be a millitia, I.e. unpaid people who have guns and are assembled to fight for the country when needed.
Also get rid of the police forces (not in there), firemen (ditto) and all infrastructure.
Build your own roads, protect your own property and defend your own country.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down in the way armed forces are targeting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda."
What - getting into interesting bedtime situations with several Swedish women? That's how Osama bin Assange is being hunted?
I could handle some of that hunting - and I hope that my person-handling skills are better than Assange's to lead to a more satisfactory outcome. For the three of us.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
"So that means we should spend billions of dollars and not catch him? Good plan."
Nice way to troll there Taco. Worked too I see. Good job.
But Yeah, I agree. Wikileaks peoples should be hunted down and captured. What to do with them after that? Hard question. After they edited the helicopter video to try to depict the US army as shooting civilians for fun I say hang every one of them.
Hurricane Island Outward Bound
OB
... And I keep seeing suggestions that their numbers, power, and influence are growing. It's conceivable that they will eventually wield some real power (or you could argue they do already) ...
They already wield a lot of power.
There is not a single openly atheist/agnostic representative in high office in the US. I'm not saying that has anything to do with "The Family", just the nature of politics in the US.
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
So "Twat" would have been OK? Or is that still too feminine and therefore verboten? So how about instead of "sweetheart", he said "harridan"? Or just a few more "retard"s. Apparently, the only way to refer to a woman is to either kid on their a bloke or insult them, else you get called sexist.
Well, if that's what women really want, asshole...
she is the first and only (R) anyone has ever fantasized about doing.
I reiterate: fantasized
She can almost see the Internets!
You insensitive clod!
Seriously, both she and Glen Beck are possibly the ultimate trolls, who live to provoke the masses. Witness the number of comments in this topic - this is *exactly* what she wants to see. To her it's not the contents of the replies to her remarks that matters, it's the quantity. She no doubt gets a certain sexual thrill knowing that she caused well over a thousand people to pitch in with their opinions.
In truth what she is doing doesn't really require a great deal of talent or brains, just the desire to do it. However it's particularly effective during times of uncertainty and unrest. Very simply, one needs to affirm people's insecurities about the current situation, get them good and angry about it, and then position yourself as the only one who can save them from this malaise. Allow me to officially Godwin this discussion by positing that Adolf Hitler himself was perhaps the greatest troll of all times by this standard.
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
You said "So that means we should spend billions of dollars and not catch him? Good plan." No, we spend a little money, so that we can find him and kill him. That should also serve as a nice deterrent to the jacka$$es lining up to follow his example.
She is hot and dumb. Of formula for success in any circle of men. By a man.
I've listened to Beck's radio show a couple times, and the common theme that emerges is he encourages people to have a mindset of "I am capable, I don't need a nanny state to provide for me."
How exactly is that "preying" on them?
Your notion that we punish those who fall in our nation's jurisdiction (ie, our citizens and our agencies that helped leak the information) and not a foreign entity (such as wikileaks) was the same conclusion my coworkers and I reached the other day.
As to those individuals, they have some questions they must ask themselves: 1) Is this secret covering up immoral or illegal activities? and 2) Am I willing to accept a punishment that may include death for leaking this information?
For example, if you knew of the Tuskegee Experiment or the similar experiment in Guatemala, would you be willing to risk death for treason to reveal this state secret? If you were a German in 1943, would you risk death for treason to reveal what happened at Auschwitz?
Yes, these are extreme cases. I recognize some of the information may actually harm diplomatic relations, especially when they are official records on one person's personal opinion on a topic and not a representation of the State's view - and I would hope that foreign leaders could recognize that. Publishing those "secrets" seems trivial - but should revealing such things be considered treason? This is something I am still weighing, as I know perception and respect is vital for stable friendly international relations.
In the end, there are times where I find those that leak information to be very patriotic. Of course, I then have to look at corner cases - do I find those who assassinate doctors who perform abortions patriotic? No. So I still need to look at where this fuzzy line of morality falls - and whether an individual has a right to define it for themselves or it should be based on the majority of a society. It has been something I've milled over for many years...