You miss the point. Yes, of course your government, and some others, agree that their laws are nearly universally applicable. Yes yes, they have it in writing. That's nice. Your rules interest me as far as you can project force, and pretty soon that won't be to your borders.
The problem with your rules, and do you ever have a bunch, is that they only apply when convenient. If a US serviceman was treated like the Gitmo-detainees have been the USA would cry and call torture, screaming about the barbarity of the enemy, etc.
The USA took its freedom back largely through un-uniformed guerrilla combat and yet now wants to deny rights to combatants for failing to wear uniforms. It wouldn't matter what Assange did, or how great the benefits to the world, you'd still find some rule to justify whatever you planned.
On the other hand, when we have war crimes trials for you freaks we aren't going to point at any historic precedent or supporting treaties, we're merely going to treat you the way you advocate others being treated, which is arbitrarily and brutally. You support and justify the wars - even post revelation of Bush's lies, you can take the blame for them.
1) No, Gitmo and the torture was almost totally irrelevant. You'd have gotten better results putting the money into reading tea leaves. Gitmo created more enemies than it ever housed.
2) Your own government labelled him a heroic freedom fighter for fighting the overwhelming odds of the Russians. Who are you, you fucking coward, who at best fights heavily armed and in, not against, overwhelming numbers, to cast aspersions at a known war hero.
3) Osama was barely an enemy. He *may* have orchestrated the destruction of a few buildings, and some deaths, but the USA inflicted a hundred times more casualties among totally unrelated people to get him.
4) He's only a problem because you forcibly built a military base in his home. Get the fuck out and he'd have left you alone.
Of course the SC is loathe to override precedent giving them power, especially if it's questionable. But all you're saying is that the USA acts like its laws are universally applicable. As for needing proof, everything you guys do is proof of your attitude.
It's good to know you support the application of foreign law though, it'll make it easier when we try you and your cronies for murder for supporting an unjust war.
Depends which side you're on. I'm sure you're all over exposing Osama's operational secrets and putting his network's lives at risk.
For the rest of the world, *you're* the cockroaches. We kick piles of garbage and see you villainous fucks scatter for the shadows. Revealing your operational details saves lives, or at least explains how they were lost.
As long as you value your secrets more than our lives we're pretty much required to ferret them out and expose them, for safety.
No, you may have killed people with guts and plumbs, but if you support keeping the kind of secrets that the USA routinely keeps, you *are* a traitor. That you swore to do it just makes you a convenient patsy. That you did it against your own beliefs - that's just baffling. That you're threatening someone who says unpleasant things just shows what you're like and why we need to expose people like you.
As for the necessity of diplomacy, I've not only found that I could get through life without lying to placate the thugs and bullies but that it's led to further tears almost anytime anyone else tries it. You don't deal with rattlesnakes - at most you keep their attention fixated on you while someone clubs them to death from behind.
Somewhere along the line we lost the concept of citizens taking up arms in defense of their homes and families and turned it into this abomination where following orders is prized above all. That "shithead" private is a better man, and ultimately doing more for the USA, than the rest of the soldiers who blithely murder a bunch of innocents.
There's a world of difference between the bullshit of "providing military assistance" and details of their operations. We've known meaningless nothings forever but before Wikileaks concrete details were rare. That some US operations are somewhat rushed is thoroughly unimportant before the public's obligation to know what's being done in their names.
If the USA wanted cooperation in keeping secrets they shouldn't have killed so many people with their lies.
You're a dishonest fucker. The leaks have revealed the covered up deaths of civilians, more evidence that the reasons for the war were faked, that the USA uses undue pressure to coerce the signing of bills like ACTA, that the USA is perfectly happy dealing with terrorists who elevate themselves to a state level, etc.
All far more important than some figurehead of yet another group of politically motivated terrorists.
If he sickens you with his need for energy, why do you support the USA's empire-building to go get it?
Oh, btw, you're the traitor. Anyone conspiring to keep secrets from the electorate, or supporting doing so, is destroying the country from the inside out.
Exactly, so knowing that at least one of the documents contained critical information for the people, he (whoever leaked the documents) had to leak all of them. Nothing else would be guaranteed to get all the dangerous secrets.
And of course it's obvious that you protect the victims of the criminal before you protect the criminal, so even if the information would have fundamentally hurt the USA (which is far from clear) you'd have to release it anyways because they're clearly prosecuting an illegal war under false pretenses.
Of course, they're willing baby-killers. They're still in the armed forces despite it being clear that Bush made up the reasons for war in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Not only was Iraq totally uninvolved, but Osama was only (supposedly) staying in an unpopulated area of Afghanistan - certainly not a reason to kill peasants in another part of country or go empire building.
If these thugs can't be bothered to investigate what they're fighting for, or value patriotism above truth, they are the problem.
Wikileaks gets the data to the people. Without knowledge of what's going on your vote is irrelevant and meaningless. Without knowledgeable voters our democracy is a sham. If you love America you MUST support Wikileaks.
Read up on how the Times (and every other news source in the USA) held off on publishing details of domestic wiretapping, among other things, at the request of the government at election time.
Oh totally, one of our soldier dying, that'd be such a tragedy. I mean, it's not like for every US citizen/soldier who died in this since 9/11 our forces have killed thirty people, most innocent, mostly civilians, often children...
Oh yeah, that's exactly how it is. So no, I guess that means it'd be poetic fucking justice if every one of the fuckers choked to death on their own grenades, not a tragedy.
And, you. You could go too, you war-mongering prick.
He's a patriot (or falsely accused) because he revealed the truth to the electorate. It's not guaranteed to make things better but lies can pretty much be guaranteed to make things worse.
You've always been paying $4/gallon for gas, or more, but the cost is hidden in your taxes and the functioning of government.
People simply want the veil to be lifted so that the true costs of things are revealed, thus making the case for products currently kept out of the market by unfair subsidies.
And for bonus points, which one is for trying the mongers of unjust wars for murder and treason?
We knew Iraq wasn't a democracy when Saddam got 90%+ of the vote, always. But the top two parties in the USA consistently share 95% of the votes, and everyone knows "a vote for a third party is a vote _____" as "wasted" and yet we pretend we're a democracy.
We knew Iran wasn't a democracy when their theocracy vetted candidates and controlled not only the vote counting but all independent review of the result. Both parties in the USA are headed by people who profess belief in fantastical space-friends who will save our 'souls' and who owe allegiance to their church more fundamentally than to their oaths of office.
As long as government apologists justify this by saying "Vote, or it's your fault" we're stuck with no real choice.
Microsoft gets the blame for Vista because they knew it wasn't ready but forced it into the market with sleazy dealings (bundling) even against consumer backlash.
Slashdot Mirror
You miss the point. Yes, of course your government, and some others, agree that their laws are nearly universally applicable. Yes yes, they have it in writing. That's nice. Your rules interest me as far as you can project force, and pretty soon that won't be to your borders.
The problem with your rules, and do you ever have a bunch, is that they only apply when convenient. If a US serviceman was treated like the Gitmo-detainees have been the USA would cry and call torture, screaming about the barbarity of the enemy, etc.
The USA took its freedom back largely through un-uniformed guerrilla combat and yet now wants to deny rights to combatants for failing to wear uniforms. It wouldn't matter what Assange did, or how great the benefits to the world, you'd still find some rule to justify whatever you planned.
On the other hand, when we have war crimes trials for you freaks we aren't going to point at any historic precedent or supporting treaties, we're merely going to treat you the way you advocate others being treated, which is arbitrarily and brutally. You support and justify the wars - even post revelation of Bush's lies, you can take the blame for them.
Pft. That's such a load of shit.
1) No, Gitmo and the torture was almost totally irrelevant. You'd have gotten better results putting the money into reading tea leaves. Gitmo created more enemies than it ever housed.
2) Your own government labelled him a heroic freedom fighter for fighting the overwhelming odds of the Russians. Who are you, you fucking coward, who at best fights heavily armed and in, not against, overwhelming numbers, to cast aspersions at a known war hero.
3) Osama was barely an enemy. He *may* have orchestrated the destruction of a few buildings, and some deaths, but the USA inflicted a hundred times more casualties among totally unrelated people to get him.
4) He's only a problem because you forcibly built a military base in his home. Get the fuck out and he'd have left you alone.
Of course the SC is loathe to override precedent giving them power, especially if it's questionable. But all you're saying is that the USA acts like its laws are universally applicable. As for needing proof, everything you guys do is proof of your attitude.
It's good to know you support the application of foreign law though, it'll make it easier when we try you and your cronies for murder for supporting an unjust war.
Depends which side you're on. I'm sure you're all over exposing Osama's operational secrets and putting his network's lives at risk.
For the rest of the world, *you're* the cockroaches. We kick piles of garbage and see you villainous fucks scatter for the shadows. Revealing your operational details saves lives, or at least explains how they were lost.
As long as you value your secrets more than our lives we're pretty much required to ferret them out and expose them, for safety.
No, you may have killed people with guts and plumbs, but if you support keeping the kind of secrets that the USA routinely keeps, you *are* a traitor. That you swore to do it just makes you a convenient patsy. That you did it against your own beliefs - that's just baffling. That you're threatening someone who says unpleasant things just shows what you're like and why we need to expose people like you.
As for the necessity of diplomacy, I've not only found that I could get through life without lying to placate the thugs and bullies but that it's led to further tears almost anytime anyone else tries it. You don't deal with rattlesnakes - at most you keep their attention fixated on you while someone clubs them to death from behind.
Somewhere along the line we lost the concept of citizens taking up arms in defense of their homes and families and turned it into this abomination where following orders is prized above all. That "shithead" private is a better man, and ultimately doing more for the USA, than the rest of the soldiers who blithely murder a bunch of innocents.
Thank you, you pathetic shit, but I'll protect myself, thanks. As for your prediction than I'm a pacifist, that's a good thing for you to think.
What is it with you cowards who will do anything, and trade anything, for useless and illusory security?
There's a world of difference between the bullshit of "providing military assistance" and details of their operations. We've known meaningless nothings forever but before Wikileaks concrete details were rare. That some US operations are somewhat rushed is thoroughly unimportant before the public's obligation to know what's being done in their names.
If the USA wanted cooperation in keeping secrets they shouldn't have killed so many people with their lies.
You're a dishonest fucker. The leaks have revealed the covered up deaths of civilians, more evidence that the reasons for the war were faked, that the USA uses undue pressure to coerce the signing of bills like ACTA, that the USA is perfectly happy dealing with terrorists who elevate themselves to a state level, etc.
All far more important than some figurehead of yet another group of politically motivated terrorists.
If he sickens you with his need for energy, why do you support the USA's empire-building to go get it?
Oh, btw, you're the traitor. Anyone conspiring to keep secrets from the electorate, or supporting doing so, is destroying the country from the inside out.
Exactly, so knowing that at least one of the documents contained critical information for the people, he (whoever leaked the documents) had to leak all of them. Nothing else would be guaranteed to get all the dangerous secrets.
And of course it's obvious that you protect the victims of the criminal before you protect the criminal, so even if the information would have fundamentally hurt the USA (which is far from clear) you'd have to release it anyways because they're clearly prosecuting an illegal war under false pretenses.
A radical organization like Al Qaeda doesn't remain leaderless for long
Oh yeah, and you know that because you've got a fucking degree in the psychology and operations of radical organizations.
Or, you've watched Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome and have an active, if poor, imagination.
1) Bullshit, you fucking liar.
2) The USA causes, on average, more than 250 deaths a day in Afghanistan and Iraq alone - virtually all innocents.
Of course, they're willing baby-killers. They're still in the armed forces despite it being clear that Bush made up the reasons for war in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Not only was Iraq totally uninvolved, but Osama was only (supposedly) staying in an unpopulated area of Afghanistan - certainly not a reason to kill peasants in another part of country or go empire building.
If these thugs can't be bothered to investigate what they're fighting for, or value patriotism above truth, they are the problem.
Wikileaks gets the data to the people. Without knowledge of what's going on your vote is irrelevant and meaningless. Without knowledgeable voters our democracy is a sham. If you love America you MUST support Wikileaks.
Read up on how the Times (and every other news source in the USA) held off on publishing details of domestic wiretapping, among other things, at the request of the government at election time.
Oh totally, one of our soldier dying, that'd be such a tragedy. I mean, it's not like for every US citizen/soldier who died in this since 9/11 our forces have killed thirty people, most innocent, mostly civilians, often children...
Oh yeah, that's exactly how it is. So no, I guess that means it'd be poetic fucking justice if every one of the fuckers choked to death on their own grenades, not a tragedy.
And, you. You could go too, you war-mongering prick.
You think George Washington would have had someone executed for leaking documents showing his forces wantonly killing civilians?
You've got a pretty low opinion of the man.
Shoot the messenger. That'll make it all better.
He's a patriot (or falsely accused) because he revealed the truth to the electorate. It's not guaranteed to make things better but lies can pretty much be guaranteed to make things worse.
You've always been paying $4/gallon for gas, or more, but the cost is hidden in your taxes and the functioning of government.
People simply want the veil to be lifted so that the true costs of things are revealed, thus making the case for products currently kept out of the market by unfair subsidies.
Because reprinting the hymn cards for the hate rallies is expensive.
It's value is that together with every other leak it forms a complete picture of what our government is/was doing.
Do you appreciate having to vote blind, it being illegal to inform you of the true actions of your representatives?
Pray tell, which party is against unjust war?
And for bonus points, which one is for trying the mongers of unjust wars for murder and treason?
We knew Iraq wasn't a democracy when Saddam got 90%+ of the vote, always. But the top two parties in the USA consistently share 95% of the votes, and everyone knows "a vote for a third party is a vote _____" as "wasted" and yet we pretend we're a democracy.
We knew Iran wasn't a democracy when their theocracy vetted candidates and controlled not only the vote counting but all independent review of the result. Both parties in the USA are headed by people who profess belief in fantastical space-friends who will save our 'souls' and who owe allegiance to their church more fundamentally than to their oaths of office.
As long as government apologists justify this by saying "Vote, or it's your fault" we're stuck with no real choice.
If you think Gitmo is related to any valid or useful military actions please list them.
Leave out any military action entered into on lies and false pretenses, or knowingly against uninvolved targets.
And if you aided or abetted the USA in any way the rest of the world should treat you as a war criminal.
Or are you merely saying that the supreme court is full of politicians and frightened children instead of principled adults?
What's the case against Osama? Comfortable making it in court? If not, sit the fuck down asshole.
The world is far safer with the jingoistic actions of the USA exposed.
Microsoft gets the blame for Vista because they knew it wasn't ready but forced it into the market with sleazy dealings (bundling) even against consumer backlash.