what do you mean Julian has no credibility ?? TBH the guy is a fucking Hero in my books about time someone stood up there should be more hacks and what have you , revealing Government espionage and corruption
If people and other countries knew the actual depth of what USA had done for instance look at Turkey recently wanna bet USA involvement in that ???
Its all coming out soon people are not stupid and see whats happening its only going to kick usa on its ass and all alone that will infact cause them to go under
Trust is the hardest to gain once trust is lost its never repairable
IMO countries are already turning there backs on USA
If you think about USA's involvment in Stuxnet yet they screaming at chinese for hacking USA is rather a double standard
Julian Assange is a selfish asshat who is only interested in himself and his 15 minutes. I think he's a coward. I despise the commercial aspect of this industry of transparency at all costs. I am not belittling the disclosure of embarrassing cables or other secret documents being published, I am belittling Julian Assange. There is a difference.
To clarify, I am saying you do not have credibility, with me, because you choose to use JA and wikileaks in your post. It is a classic example of the slipperly slope fallacy. For example, Rush (or choose your own) is against gay marriage, and is vehemently pro-life to the point he uses the term infanticide on the reg. What frustrates me is that he feigns giving a shit about having proper facilities, requiring doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at hospitals. The thing that irks me is that they scream patient safety but they only care about abortions and stopping them. They don't give a shit about increasing funding for WIC or other programs for low income individuals. It isn't black and white, and that's a non-starter for nearly everyone.
Back to JA/wikileaks. I find immense value in the work they do and how they contribute to transparency. Plus, I am entertained at the idea of these asshat politicians being outed for doing wrong. Or claiming that their shit doesn't stink. I don't bother with wikileaks but I prefer less biased info, my go to has been cryptome.org. I think John Young has done more positive things in this field than wikileaks. That could easily be my preference showing. I appreciate your input and I respect your opinion, I just disagree about JA and wikileaks.
It is difficult for me to have 'what if' conversations about things we know nothing about, or claims that are unable to be verified. I don't drink the koolaid, and I am skeptical by nature. I see JA as a coward, not a hero. He is a unique situation and I wouldn't classify him with anyone I consider credible, such as cryptome and other sites. There is just too much bullshit to wade through.
Here is why these arguments are difficult. I am going to post a couple of quotes from your reply.
-"If people and other countries knew the actual depth of what USA had done...turkey...us involvment..."
I would be more than happy to bet you money that you are unable to show anything remotely close to verifiable information, a link, a story, shit, I'd take a wikileaks link if you have it, to support your claim of US involvement. I may agree or disagree, but the onus of proof of your argument is on you. So,
prove it. If you can't verify your claims then it's just noise, and it does nothing but widen the divide. I hope it's clear that I have no ill will towards you personally, I just don't agree. What is the actual depth of what the USA did in Turkey? Please share.
-"Its all coming out soon people are not stupid and see whats happening..."
What, precisely, is coming out soon? This is the part that frustrates me, that you are substantiating your claim but nobody can verify it, agree or disagree. I think it's disingenuous to use incite reaction by making ridiculous claims. They might be legit to you, but again, prove it. I guess I can't disagree because you aren't saying anything.
-"its only going to kick usa on its ass and all alone that in infact cause them to go under..."
What are you talking about? What is going to 'kick usa on its ass'? What exactly do you mean by 'cause them to go under'? Who is causing who to 'go under'. Underwear?
Stuxnet is a completely different animal that JA or wikileaks. What is your understanding of Stuxnet and what do you think happened? Do you think it was a joint mission between the US, Israel, Japan, and who else? It is most definitely a double standard and you should be used to them. You are much smarter than you are acting. You say double standard, but I don't think anyone would disagree with you, but what does that mean, and why do you bring it up?
This will be the first election where turnout is higher and people are voting against someone rather than voting for someone. Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be our next president. That scares the shit out of me.
We can't really do shit to China since they own our debt, and I do not see that changing anytime soon. I'm sure we have dirty laundry but so do they. It's just a pissing contest. What is sad is that with voter turnout and a close election, that our president will get substantially less than a majority vote to win the presidency. And we wonder why younger folks are such assholes? Look at their choices. It's like deciding between having your left nut smashed with a hammer or your right nut. Either way we're fucked.
I probably contradicted myself once or thrice, let me know. I enjoy the discussion.