"It would be hard to find a country in South America that hasn't had the CIA assassinate (or try to) at least one of their leaders in the last 50 years."
Really? Name them. I can't think of any but there might be a few. There's been a few times the US has financially supported governments or opposition governments.
And what kinda of nut job do you have to be to attempt to implicate US involvement with that plane crash you linked to?
Feel free to have your own conclusions, hate the war itself, despise war in general (we all should). But please, don't fall for sensationalism. Typically, when someone attempts to make up your mind for you (as in the case with Assange when he named his video leak) it means the true facts don't support the view they want you to have.
That wasn't what was in the video. Which is my problem with wikileaks. If you want to leak information, leak it. If you want to interpret/edit it, write "agenda driven op-ed" on top of all your stuff.
There "were" armed insurgents in the video. There was a camera man as well. I don't say I agree with the decisions made in that video. But the way the video was leaked, and the slight editing done to it before it was leaked, doesn't paint the picture of "random people in the streets".
Again, you have to get over the fact that not everyone in the video was an unarmed camera man or just random people. That there was known fire coming from that area.
Here's a good discussion of it and my point of Assange's sensationalism. http://original.antiwar.com/henderson/2010/04/25/on-collateral-murder/
And that article doesn't even point out the fact that there were armed men and weapons found.
In conclusion, what do you think happens in war? Good people do bad things. That's war. You just hope it's for the right reasons. That they act callous or jovial is a human defense mechanism for the situation they're in and nearly every single one of us would resort to a similar state of mind.
OMG. Yes, comparing the US evils to the Soviets. Great one. Shows the mindset of fucktards like you so clearly.
It's amazing you place the blame on anything but the Germans in your write up. As if they weren't responsible for their own actions. They were forced into it. You might know history, but you clearly don't know how to compare/interpret it.
You mean the video with the people with guns? Oh, I thought you watched the video. Guess not. Good thing you got modded insightful. Collateral Murder had multiple people with guns in the video. 100% known fact. No, not the camera equipment that looked like a gun. There were people with guns there. Guns were found after it was inspected and visible in the video.
But your post and rating is typical of slashdot's current group-think. It's just a shame so many people choose to be ignorant.
And what does him being a charlatan with a video and posting the names of informants have to do with whether a war was just or not? Was WWII just? Was Dresden OK? Is there anything close that Dresden in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Did you know Communism was evil? I'm an atheist, I don't have the same "right" or "wrong" moral view you might think I have. But under any definition the Soviet's were fucking evil. Stalin = GWB? You're fucking insane if you go that route. The Taliban did blow up the Towers. The US should have gone in there. Iraq is more muddled, but at the same time Saddam never should have been allowed to stay in power. You know, France loved financing his regime, but whatever. Imperialism is bad. Tell that to the Moors when they tried to conquer Europe. If the world was all hippy's I'd love to stop military spending. But you know, until that happens I'd rather the US be the power then say Iran. I know I know. 6 of 1 half a dozen of another. Just two sides the same coin. Be glad there are people that make sure you have internet access if though you shit on them.
In closing, make the world a better place. Just don't be so fucking naive you write crap you just did without context.
He releases with a bias. The "Collateral Murder" headline was sensationalistic. People, that you know, have been in similar situations, have broken it down pretty well and not been the ass about it that he has. No to mention he edited the video he received. He endangered the lives of soldiers and informants posting his "leaks". This guy is a bias assclown and is nothing but the voice of people that already "hate the man". Integrity? He seems to have none.
If this guy really wants to change things he should go under cover with the military and see just how strict they are with the UCMJ and Geneva Convention. The answer is "very". If you take any large group of people, someone will fuck up. It's why there are bad cops and firemen and teachers and politicians and soldiers. But I have no respect for this guy. He's a pure academic type that has no real life experience with, you know, life. What a Champion of the People.
I'd prefer we'd stop doing that to be honest, while also getting rid of the bad ones. Not to mention, doing business with them. Something nearly all governments are guilty of.
Hi. I'm pro-war. OK, I'm not. But I'm not upset we went to Afghanistan. Iraq less so, but I'm not upset Saddam was toppled. It just would have been a lot nicer if more of the "free-world" went in from the start so as to help remove a ruthless dictator from power.
And yes, I'd like for us to go into other places as well. It's amazing how some people, with freedom, bitch and moan about taking over brutal dictators. It makes it much harder when the world is torn on the issue. People like Saddam should never be allowed to stay in power. Not in this modern age. Those protesting the war are basically turning their back on basic human rights.
It's not like the US went to war with Canada. It went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Two of the many places we need to go into.
Why? You ever go to Germany? They throw their version of the "N" word around in public all the time. Go to a football match there, they'll scream it at black people openly. It's pathetic how racist they are there.
America does spend half the world's defense budgets. And social programs that would work in smaller countries won't work in America due to issues in the inner cities that are made up of mostly minorities.
Europeans as a whole right now are very liberal, and it only really works because the US exists to protect them. How liberal would the Netherlands be right now without the US? Not very.
And comparing almost all of Europe to America is pointless. Europe isn't carrying the burden of half the world's defense spending. The US is. Europeans throw barbs at the US, but the US is the only thing keeping people like Ahmadinejad from taking over Europe. You know what Europeans I like. The Russians. Because they're nice. They play well with others.
There's reality. And then there's "throw crap at the US" European reality.
You know, I want national health care. I just don't think the German system would work. You know in Germany they treat black people like shit. Because they have like 12 of them. In the US we have like 30 million of them. And they got screwed at the start and still suffer from it. But national health care won't work well here because of minority issues in inner cities. The Dutch don't have the problem. Not because they didn't want to, they drove the fucking ships. They just didn't end up with it.
Seriously, I'm so sick of Euro babies throwing darts at the US. If the US wasn't in Iraq, Iraq would eventually be in France.
I wish the US would be isolationists. I know, so do all the Europeans. Until they start killing each other, then the loser wants our help. I'd rather you just all die to be honest.
Android didn't "really" exist until November. v1.x was the play toy. The first real attempt to jump into the game was the Droid. Apple changed the game with the first iPhone, no doubt. But for Android to do what it's done in such a short time is amazing. Apple isn't staying neck and neck. They started with a huge lead and it's apparent now are not going to keep it.
And you can say the mass selling isn't Apple. But that's you stuck in mac land when laser jets kept the company alive with desktop publishing. the iThings aren't like that. They are 100% all about mass appeal and mass selling. When Apple has 4% market share of smartphones it will be iIrrelevant because it won't be the "in" thing to have. The developers will hit it second, not first. And it just won't be as good or at the best for apple, any better.
In one corner you have Apple+ATT, and in the other Motorola + HTC + Samsung + LG + (like 10 other smaller manufactures) + Google + Verizon + Tmobile + Spint/Nextel + (like 10 other smaller carriers)
That's just not a winning fight for Apple. And even if they added other carries, the other carries are already selling the other devices. Apple's 1.5 product releases a year won't keep up. The installed user base won't keep up. The innovation won't keep up. I'll be honest, people keep talking about an iPhone on Verizon. I just don't see it happening. Verizon seems to be doing pretty good with Android right now.
So why it's not a valid comparison or whether it is or not, doesn't matter. The end game right now is bad for apple.
FTFA: The Burst.net employee who handled the request erroneously believed that the FBI would want to seize the customer's server and thus the employee cut off service to Blogetery. Marr said the FBI, however, never asked for the server.
Well, that could clear up some of the shitty posts here.
Also FFTA: Sources close to the investigation say that included in those materials were the names of American citizens targeted for assassination by al-Qaeda. Messages from Osama bin Laden and other leaders of the terrorist organization, as well as bomb-making tips, were also allegedly found on the server.
Now, just my speculation here, but obviously there's a lot of "terrorist" crap all over American servers that the Gov doesn't give two shits about. So maybe in this case the FBI concluded that the information was actual communication from the organization, etc, and not just drivel. If so, good for them for removing it. Removing a "hit list" doesn't violate free speech that I care for. Either way, burstnet made a mistake and one that is probably an honest mistake. Shit happens.
Developers should have offices. Near each other. But offices. It's a highly technical field and one that should have some amount of respect. The cubicle farm people can all go rot in hell or work for EA or SAP or something.
Who the fuck are you talking to? I learned long ago not to use unrelated actions as an excuse for another. The US military should not have tried to cover this up. I'm not cool that they did. But that is not related to Wikileaks misrepresenting the "facts" as I see them. Not do I think they should even represent the facts.
I'm concerned enough to know I want an impartial site for leaks. Not just wants they want to leak because it meats an agenda. And the was they released this they clearly have an agenda more then just "knowledge".
I never voted for a Bush in my life, but it's also interesting that after the fact we know that Iraq didn't have WMD like they claimed. But that we believed they did because they wanted us to believe they did because it was a show of power, mostly for Iran.
You're writing on an internet discussion forum you twat. What do you think we do here? And nothing I wrote was whine. I gave my reasons. It's not like I wrote "They suq" or anything. I mean, what do you expect to be seen in the "discussion"?
Wikileaks shouldn't be interpreting their links. That goes against their own mission statement. They've politicized their leaks and that's not right nor just. It's a piece of agenda. That's my opinion and if you don't like it feel free to discuss it or not. But all you've done is show me that there's ignorant people out there that like to stifle dissent. How ironic given the topic.
http://blog.ajmartinez.com/2010/04/05/wikileaks-collateral-murder/
Their bias isn't a good thing. You may or may not agree with their opinions on this one particular case. But apparently they are not wikileaks. They are OpEdLinks. And that isn't good. We can draw our own conclusions. The military in this video acted poorly, but they didn't realize they were firing on civilians.
Maybe wikileaks can decrypt some other military videos where the military didn't engage because they were afraid of harming civilians and they call got blown up because of it. Right? What would wikileaks call that website? You know as well as I do they wouldn't touch it because it's not up their agenda, I mean, alley.
Right, and when you don't like the service you got at McDonald's you should never say anything because you can go to Burger King and get one.
Oh wait, because I paid for the burger I get to complain.
OK, so if I'm in a store and I see a misleading ad, even though I don't plain to buy the product, I shouldn't say anything because I didn't pay?
Or, if I'm watching TV and I see a show that's completely full of misinformation I should never say anything because I can always start my own TV show?
Oh, wait, the world's not the garbage you tried to paint it. I can voice my opinion about anything I want and don't have to be willing to "make my own" to do so.
I have every right to tell them what they should and should not do. And they have a right not to listen. And people's opinions have a right to change based on the back and forth, or not at all.
What part of that didn't you understand before you posted?
Slashdot Mirror
"It would be hard to find a country in South America that hasn't had the CIA assassinate (or try to) at least one of their leaders in the last 50 years."
Really? Name them. I can't think of any but there might be a few. There's been a few times the US has financially supported governments or opposition governments.
And what kinda of nut job do you have to be to attempt to implicate US involvement with that plane crash you linked to?
It's because he has an agenda. He's not about making society transparent. He's about exposing those he views as political opponents.
I've had the same "troll" stuff for my views on Assange as well. Which is annoying because -1 Troll != Do not agree.
Here's another article I was looking for but couldn't find it again at first.
http://www.lineofdeparture.com/2010/04/08/upon-further-review-collateral-murder/
Feel free to have your own conclusions, hate the war itself, despise war in general (we all should). But please, don't fall for sensationalism. Typically, when someone attempts to make up your mind for you (as in the case with Assange when he named his video leak) it means the true facts don't support the view they want you to have.
That wasn't what was in the video. Which is my problem with wikileaks. If you want to leak information, leak it. If you want to interpret/edit it, write "agenda driven op-ed" on top of all your stuff.
There "were" armed insurgents in the video. There was a camera man as well. I don't say I agree with the decisions made in that video. But the way the video was leaked, and the slight editing done to it before it was leaked, doesn't paint the picture of "random people in the streets".
Again, you have to get over the fact that not everyone in the video was an unarmed camera man or just random people. That there was known fire coming from that area. Here's a good discussion of it and my point of Assange's sensationalism.
http://original.antiwar.com/henderson/2010/04/25/on-collateral-murder/
And that article doesn't even point out the fact that there were armed men and weapons found.
In conclusion, what do you think happens in war? Good people do bad things. That's war. You just hope it's for the right reasons. That they act callous or jovial is a human defense mechanism for the situation they're in and nearly every single one of us would resort to a similar state of mind.
OMG. Yes, comparing the US evils to the Soviets. Great one. Shows the mindset of fucktards like you so clearly.
It's amazing you place the blame on anything but the Germans in your write up. As if they weren't responsible for their own actions. They were forced into it. You might know history, but you clearly don't know how to compare/interpret it.
You mean the video with the people with guns? Oh, I thought you watched the video. Guess not. Good thing you got modded insightful. Collateral Murder had multiple people with guns in the video. 100% known fact. No, not the camera equipment that looked like a gun. There were people with guns there. Guns were found after it was inspected and visible in the video.
But your post and rating is typical of slashdot's current group-think. It's just a shame so many people choose to be ignorant.
And what does him being a charlatan with a video and posting the names of informants have to do with whether a war was just or not? Was WWII just? Was Dresden OK? Is there anything close that Dresden in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Did you know Communism was evil? I'm an atheist, I don't have the same "right" or "wrong" moral view you might think I have. But under any definition the Soviet's were fucking evil. Stalin = GWB? You're fucking insane if you go that route. The Taliban did blow up the Towers. The US should have gone in there. Iraq is more muddled, but at the same time Saddam never should have been allowed to stay in power. You know, France loved financing his regime, but whatever. Imperialism is bad. Tell that to the Moors when they tried to conquer Europe. If the world was all hippy's I'd love to stop military spending. But you know, until that happens I'd rather the US be the power then say Iran. I know I know. 6 of 1 half a dozen of another. Just two sides the same coin. Be glad there are people that make sure you have internet access if though you shit on them.
In closing, make the world a better place. Just don't be so fucking naive you write crap you just did without context.
He releases with a bias. The "Collateral Murder" headline was sensationalistic. People, that you know, have been in similar situations, have broken it down pretty well and not been the ass about it that he has. No to mention he edited the video he received. He endangered the lives of soldiers and informants posting his "leaks". This guy is a bias assclown and is nothing but the voice of people that already "hate the man". Integrity? He seems to have none.
If this guy really wants to change things he should go under cover with the military and see just how strict they are with the UCMJ and Geneva Convention. The answer is "very". If you take any large group of people, someone will fuck up. It's why there are bad cops and firemen and teachers and politicians and soldiers. But I have no respect for this guy. He's a pure academic type that has no real life experience with, you know, life. What a Champion of the People.
I'd prefer we'd stop doing that to be honest, while also getting rid of the bad ones. Not to mention, doing business with them. Something nearly all governments are guilty of.
Hi. I'm pro-war. OK, I'm not. But I'm not upset we went to Afghanistan. Iraq less so, but I'm not upset Saddam was toppled. It just would have been a lot nicer if more of the "free-world" went in from the start so as to help remove a ruthless dictator from power.
And yes, I'd like for us to go into other places as well. It's amazing how some people, with freedom, bitch and moan about taking over brutal dictators. It makes it much harder when the world is torn on the issue. People like Saddam should never be allowed to stay in power. Not in this modern age. Those protesting the war are basically turning their back on basic human rights.
It's not like the US went to war with Canada. It went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Two of the many places we need to go into.
Really?
Why? You ever go to Germany? They throw their version of the "N" word around in public all the time. Go to a football match there, they'll scream it at black people openly. It's pathetic how racist they are there.
America does spend half the world's defense budgets. And social programs that would work in smaller countries won't work in America due to issues in the inner cities that are made up of mostly minorities.
Europeans as a whole right now are very liberal, and it only really works because the US exists to protect them. How liberal would the Netherlands be right now without the US? Not very.
And comparing almost all of Europe to America is pointless. Europe isn't carrying the burden of half the world's defense spending. The US is. Europeans throw barbs at the US, but the US is the only thing keeping people like Ahmadinejad from taking over Europe. You know what Europeans I like. The Russians. Because they're nice. They play well with others.
There's reality. And then there's "throw crap at the US" European reality.
You know, I want national health care. I just don't think the German system would work. You know in Germany they treat black people like shit. Because they have like 12 of them. In the US we have like 30 million of them. And they got screwed at the start and still suffer from it. But national health care won't work well here because of minority issues in inner cities. The Dutch don't have the problem. Not because they didn't want to, they drove the fucking ships. They just didn't end up with it.
Seriously, I'm so sick of Euro babies throwing darts at the US. If the US wasn't in Iraq, Iraq would eventually be in France.
I wish the US would be isolationists. I know, so do all the Europeans. Until they start killing each other, then the loser wants our help. I'd rather you just all die to be honest.
Android didn't "really" exist until November. v1.x was the play toy. The first real attempt to jump into the game was the Droid. Apple changed the game with the first iPhone, no doubt. But for Android to do what it's done in such a short time is amazing. Apple isn't staying neck and neck. They started with a huge lead and it's apparent now are not going to keep it.
And you can say the mass selling isn't Apple. But that's you stuck in mac land when laser jets kept the company alive with desktop publishing. the iThings aren't like that. They are 100% all about mass appeal and mass selling. When Apple has 4% market share of smartphones it will be iIrrelevant because it won't be the "in" thing to have. The developers will hit it second, not first. And it just won't be as good or at the best for apple, any better.
In one corner you have Apple+ATT, and in the other Motorola + HTC + Samsung + LG + (like 10 other smaller manufactures) + Google + Verizon + Tmobile + Spint/Nextel + (like 10 other smaller carriers)
That's just not a winning fight for Apple. And even if they added other carries, the other carries are already selling the other devices. Apple's 1.5 product releases a year won't keep up. The installed user base won't keep up. The innovation won't keep up. I'll be honest, people keep talking about an iPhone on Verizon. I just don't see it happening. Verizon seems to be doing pretty good with Android right now.
So why it's not a valid comparison or whether it is or not, doesn't matter. The end game right now is bad for apple.
FTFA:
The Burst.net employee who handled the request erroneously believed that the FBI would want to seize the customer's server and thus the employee cut off service to Blogetery. Marr said the FBI, however, never asked for the server.
Well, that could clear up some of the shitty posts here.
Also FFTA:
Sources close to the investigation say that included in those materials were the names of American citizens targeted for assassination by al-Qaeda. Messages from Osama bin Laden and other leaders of the terrorist organization, as well as bomb-making tips, were also allegedly found on the server.
Now, just my speculation here, but obviously there's a lot of "terrorist" crap all over American servers that the Gov doesn't give two shits about. So maybe in this case the FBI concluded that the information was actual communication from the organization, etc, and not just drivel. If so, good for them for removing it. Removing a "hit list" doesn't violate free speech that I care for. Either way, burstnet made a mistake and one that is probably an honest mistake. Shit happens.
Developers should have offices. Near each other. But offices. It's a highly technical field and one that should have some amount of respect. The cubicle farm people can all go rot in hell or work for EA or SAP or something.
People still play Warhammer Online?
Who the fuck are you talking to? I learned long ago not to use unrelated actions as an excuse for another. The US military should not have tried to cover this up. I'm not cool that they did. But that is not related to Wikileaks misrepresenting the "facts" as I see them. Not do I think they should even represent the facts.
I'm concerned enough to know I want an impartial site for leaks. Not just wants they want to leak because it meats an agenda. And the was they released this they clearly have an agenda more then just "knowledge".
I never voted for a Bush in my life, but it's also interesting that after the fact we know that Iraq didn't have WMD like they claimed. But that we believed they did because they wanted us to believe they did because it was a show of power, mostly for Iran.
You're writing on an internet discussion forum you twat. What do you think we do here? And nothing I wrote was whine. I gave my reasons. It's not like I wrote "They suq" or anything. I mean, what do you expect to be seen in the "discussion"?
Wikileaks shouldn't be interpreting their links. That goes against their own mission statement. They've politicized their leaks and that's not right nor just. It's a piece of agenda. That's my opinion and if you don't like it feel free to discuss it or not. But all you've done is show me that there's ignorant people out there that like to stifle dissent. How ironic given the topic.
Note to mod. "Don't agree" != Troll.
http://blog.ajmartinez.com/2010/04/05/wikileaks-collateral-murder/ Their bias isn't a good thing. You may or may not agree with their opinions on this one particular case. But apparently they are not wikileaks. They are OpEdLinks. And that isn't good. We can draw our own conclusions. The military in this video acted poorly, but they didn't realize they were firing on civilians. Maybe wikileaks can decrypt some other military videos where the military didn't engage because they were afraid of harming civilians and they call got blown up because of it. Right? What would wikileaks call that website? You know as well as I do they wouldn't touch it because it's not up their agenda, I mean, alley.
Right, and when you don't like the service you got at McDonald's you should never say anything because you can go to Burger King and get one.
Oh wait, because I paid for the burger I get to complain.
OK, so if I'm in a store and I see a misleading ad, even though I don't plain to buy the product, I shouldn't say anything because I didn't pay?
Or, if I'm watching TV and I see a show that's completely full of misinformation I should never say anything because I can always start my own TV show?
Oh, wait, the world's not the garbage you tried to paint it. I can voice my opinion about anything I want and don't have to be willing to "make my own" to do so.
I have every right to tell them what they should and should not do. And they have a right not to listen. And people's opinions have a right to change based on the back and forth, or not at all.
What part of that didn't you understand before you posted?