Because a lot of so-called Liberals don’t seem to get it
Governments and individuals are different types of entities. The presumption for government is that its proceedings and actions should be transparent to its citizens because it exists to serve its citizens, and they can only know that it is doing so, and doing so in ways they would approve of, if they know what it is doing. The presumption for citizens is that they have the right to privacy, unless a judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe they may have committed a crime, and even then that information should be kept private until the trial proper.
The confusion of the right of individuals to privacy and the need to for transparency in what governments do is a classification error. A liberal may use the government to do things, but is always suspicious of concentrations of power, public or private. As someone famous once said, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. And that means knowing what your government is doing. It doesn’t mean the government smearing those who oppose it by releasing private information on individuals.
Still, I’ve really appreciated the Wikileaks imbroglio, not so much for the information it revealed, but because it has revealed the authoritarians for who they are.
Comments are closed.
I’m sorry Hmmm but that’s dubious. Has anybody said the “rape case”, such as it is, proves anything like you’re implying with your question? Hmmm, no. What has been commented upon is the State’s rather transparent tactic of reviving the moribund charges against Assange as part of an overall plan to stop him and Wikileaks.
Also, the idea that the citizens who, I suppose would be otherwise manning the barricades are now standing down and doing nothing but waiting around for the next Wikileak is pretty amusing.
Who thought Wikileaks would change anything (whatever you mean by that)? Your whole white knight scenario like myiq2xu’s “hero of dude nation” stuff is just argumentative bluster though it is interesting to note that it is primarily the State’s very heavy handed response to Wikileaks that’s creating the “mythology” you’re complaining about and not some starry eyed Assange supporters or defenders.
While Wikileaks will likely not fundamentally “change anything”, they can be useful on occasion. I mean I doubt anybody here would complain if they release documents which show that B of A/Merrill committed fraud, right? Overall, as Ian said above, this episode is interesting not simply for what is actually happening but for the “interesting” reactions to it.
It appears yet another one of MYIQ2XU lies is exposed to be false, it turns out Greenwalds description of Manning’s conditions was spot on.
http://my.firedoglake.com/blog/2010/12/23/bradley-manning-speaks-about-his-conditions/
This first hand article shows that MYIQ2XU either unwittingly [given the content of his 6-7 posts & hundreds, perhaps thousands of comments, a distinct possibility], or with malice and forethought delivered the DoD/Administration distinctly false spin. Either way MYIQ2XU is a fool, because the Pentegon is walking away from it’s story leaving hacks like MYIQ2XU who regurgitated the swill onto he internet to swing in the wind.
Why does it matter the conditions under which Manning is held?
a) Because he has not been formal charged [this may be a time sensitive truth, we all know how annal MYIQ2XU can be…when it suits his needs].
b) Because…and this is the really important issue, if Manning is being held in such a manner as to extract a “confession” that falsely implicates Assange, then the corrupt who dominate our oligarchy can imprison/intimidate Assange and other non-official leakers.
This should not have to be stated…but with fools like MYIQ2XU running the show and spewing garbage on a daily basis, let me repeat this historical fact, EVERY ADMINISTRATION SINCE IKE HAS leaked “highly classified information”, ALMOST EVERY SENATOR/STAFF and CONGRESSMEN/STAFF have done as much. The real issue here is, should leaking be the sole provence of the privileged class to peruse their aims, or may their be an element of democracy in the dissemination of information? Rephrasing Ian, do you believe in fleecy-fascism, or American Democracy?
I shouldn’t have to add this either, but much “classified material” should be reclassified as “embarrassing to the elite”. Publishing this material is the equivalent of making a ‘jack-ass” movie about our precious “leaders” incompetence. You can’t hold somebody accountable if you don’t know they eff’d up.
I shouldn’t have to add this either, but much “classified material” should be reclassified as “embarrassing to the elite”.
More importantly, gov’t. classification is being used to keep crimes and lies hidden.
Two examples:
1) The video of the u.s. helicopter team firing on the van in Iraq where the man (with children in the van) was attempting to help the wounded.
2) The u.s. military’s firing “drone” missiles into Yemen, killing numerous civilians, followed by the state dept.’s denial that the u.s. military was doing this.
Actually the term is “malice aforethought.” After you google the definition try looking up “cogent argument.”
I must admit you are exceptionally good at disproving things I never said.
BTW – If you insist on talking shit about me at least spell my alias right. It’s “myiq2xu” all lower case.
kc,
Yes, they revived ‘moribund charges’.
Oooooo scary rape charges, that aren’t won’t actually convict him of anything, from the oh so scary Sweden, over leaks that aren’t leaks. ‘Is part of an overall plan to stop him and Wikileaks.’
Color me unimpressed.
And isn’t Wikileaks a bunch of hackers and dissents from around the world, so how exact does rape charges stop them? Are they supposed to be scared of those high conviction rates in Sweden, for rape without bruising, too?
Sorry, but despite you thinking as such, I don’t agree that the bs charges filed, represent a ‘heavy handed’ response by the state. It looks like kabuki theater to try and portray that he is an enemy of the state.
While you find it amusing that I think this guy promotes standing down, your own post supports that thought. You want to wait around for the B 0f A release to reveal what we already know. Did the fraud news escape you or the news reports of the govt helping to cover up the fraud before the merger? Did the foreclosure production line escape your notice? No. But still nothing is being done and Assange has been teasing this info for how long? A year now or more. Do you think releasing it when Congress was taking up financial reform it might have made a real difference? I will give that a definite maybe, but I still think the guy promotes standing down.
Geez, even Ian has an ‘Obi-Wan-Assange you are our only hope’ post. Because the rest of us “dutiful drudges” will just sit there.
http://www.ianwelsh.net/wikileaks-will-either-be-done-as-assange-does-it-or-not-at-all/
Yes, the reactions are interesting. But like Ian said, about liberals. ” is always suspicious of concentrations of power, public or private. As someone famous once said, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
Assange is a human brake stand. Lots of noise and smoke that gets us no where. I am suspicious.
Wait…y’all have been having a flamewar and didn’t invite me? *pout*
Morocco Bama — Exactly. We were in the process of trying to starve the beast when the whole thing hit the fan. Then the beast came after us in more ways than one.
Whew, thankfully Obama and Congress saved us from the tyranny of a fixed rate credit card. 😉
I agree Celsius 233…..’and therein lies the tragedy’
Hmmm,
C’mon now, of course the “rape case” (Interpol!?..lol) it’s part of the overall plan along with trying to defund Wikileaks via putting pressure on MC and Visa and working to develop charges he can be tried for if they can get Assange here and so on. I think my calling the State’s actions heavy handed is putting it mildly.
Also, who, exactly, is “standing down” waiting for Wikileaks to ride to the rescue? That’s overly dramatic. I think most people are simply following the story though of course there are people who are strongly supporting Assange/Wiki in deeds. I’m certainly not twiddling my thumbs waiting for Wikileaks to drop the bomb on the obvious fraud B of A/Merrill, or whoever, perpretrated on their clients and the public though that would be a good thing especially if the NY AG could make a good case with the info. but, as I said, I’m not standing down waiting for it.
Are little obsessive trash poster has returned to lie again, here MYIQ2XU says:
“I must admit you are exceptionally good at disproving things I never said.” – MYIQ2XU
and here at:
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/military-confinement-is-no-picnic/
MYIQ2XU says:
“Manning is charged with a serious offense and is considered a security risk.” – MYIQ2XU
Except Manning is charged under Article 92* US UMCJ Which is a general catch all similar to “conduct unbecoming”. t’s used when you want to hold somebody, but you don’t have a good case and you want a chip for a plea bargain for testimony on a more serious charge. MYIQ2XU claims to have been an MP [with as many lies as he’s told, God only knows if that’s true], if it is true, two things become clear;
1] 31B, or is it 31-A, [I let Mr. Annal tell us for sure] as an MOS, has more jerks than any other. Hell, it screens for those traits that make a jerk…a jerk. It also a great way to avoid getting duty in forward units where conditions suck. That explains, his sanctimonious attitude, think of a jerk cop, who pulls you over for going less than 5 mph over the limit…that’s MYIQ2XU MOS in spades.
2] He can be certified to be a liar.
Reading the Specs it never accuses him of transferring that information, although I’m incline to believe he transferred the US Army’s blooper videos where they kill the wrong guys. In Desert Storm I PERSONALLY KNOW that stuff like that was not classified and only a clueless asshole would pretend to think it jeopardizes Soldiers, or Marines.
MYIQ2XU is just blowing smoke up everybody’s ass, those snuff videos are classified to keep Americans ignorant about what really happens in war…so that we’ll support more senseless wars of aggression. To be clear, in the case of the videos, the guy who says he was an MP is aiding the cover-up of a piece of film that shows the killing of innocents. Like I said, MP’s have the highest concentration of sanctimonious jerks of any MOS and MYIQ2XU is proving that things don’t change.
Downloading software? Are you kidding me?
As for the cables, only one is mentioned directly and the dates of the charge make it clear the prosecution does know when it happened within a 60 day window. Who but a stupid jackass would take such a charge seriously…dare I mention MYIQ2XU?
Enough for today, let’s see what other lies and deception our resident troll poster [and dweeb MP] from Confluence can up with.
*Article 92 Text.
“Any person subject to this chapter who—
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or (3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.” Elements.
(1) Violation of or failure to obey a lawful general order or regulation.
(a) That there was in effect a certain lawful general order or regulation;
(b) That the accused had a duty to obey it; and
(c) That the accused violated or failed to obey the order or regulation.
(2) Failure to obey other lawful order.
(a) That a member of the armed forces issued a certain lawful order;
(b) That the accused had knowledge of the order;
(c) That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and
(d) That the accused failed to obey the order.
(3) Dereliction in the performance of duties.
(a) That the accused had certain duties;
(b) That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and
(c) That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency) derelict in the performance of those duties.
Really? A rape case without teeth is the scary power of the state? And since Wikileaks had to shut down earlier this year due to lack of funds but are now discussing paying their volunteers a salary. Yeah that ‘state run heavy handed defund plan’ really put them against the ropes now that they will pay their staff./snark.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703548604576037623559323348.html
To the next point.
So if Wikileaks drops the bomb on B of A. Then the NY AG could make a good case with the info? Love you do release that the NY AG can file in court to get those same records? They don’t have to wait for Wikileaks. Even your suggestion is a stand down scenario.
And to answer your question about who is standing down. Who isn’t? Where are the mass anti-war protests? Where is the mass support for the foreclosure and mortgage fraud victims? Where is the real reform on the banks? Where is the real regulations and criminal convictions for the mass scale fraud? Where is the Democratic party? Why did it take Log Cabin Republicans to push gay rights against a Democratic Admin and Congress?
And once again, why if Wikileaks had damaging info on B 0f A they didn’t release it when it could have made a difference during the financial ‘reform’ bill!? Even Wikileaks stood down. If they were really the truth and justice warriors wanting to make companies more honest. Then they would have release it then. When they could have made a difference.
Assange/Wikileaks smells funny. Their actions negate their rhetoric.
My MOS was 95B
Hmmm,
You’re really being a bit much now. I guess you’re trying to be dismissive of the State’ss actions against Wikileaks because they haven’t worked all that well, so far? So if they had been successful in tossing Assange in jail and shutting down Wikileaks THEN we’d have something to talk about huh? That’s a strange standard.
So a government can attempt to get you tossed into jail on dubious charges, try to ruin your organization, have some of its elected representatives openly call for your death, but hey, it’s no big deal. After all, you’re not in jail, ruined or dead and you are even “thinking about” paying some of your volunteer staff.
Yeah, I get it now. It was all a plot by Assange to sucker naive folks into giving Wikileaks money and “standing down” on other issues./snark
Again with the standing down stuff. Are you actually saying that because people are paying attention to the Wikileaks issue they are standing down on those other issues? Seriously? That’s pretty ridiculous even using your “mass” qualifier which is an odd qualifer to use since those other issues have in fact received much more attention from folks who would stand up on them than this Wikileaks saga.
In any event, I’d say the reality is the opposite of what you’re saying. My guess is that, for the most part, the people who’ve been supporting Wikileaks had and have been standing up for all those other issues you mentioned in your post. A good example is the very blog you’re posting in. Ian is supporting Wikileaks and has certainly been standing up on those other issues. I suspect you know that but are trying the sort of misdirection tactic one often encounters during Israeli/Palestinian discussion (i.e. Why are you “standing down” about human rights in SA or Iran?)
Your B of A argument relies on a couple of questionable assumptions. That Wikileaks had the information in question during that time and that it would have made a difference in effecting the outcome of “financial reform”. The first part is possible, the second was not likely at all.
Focusing as you do on Assange/Wikileaks misses the point. Whether they smell, or are, funny the Government/State actions against them are not right.
Sorry. You missed a good one. I’ve never seen anyone lose their shit quite so quickly and easily.
As annoying as you can be I’ve never had the impression you were behaving like a mental patient who’s off his meds.
Hmmm,
“So if Wikileaks drops the bomb on B of A. Then the NY AG could make a good case with the info? Love you do release that the NY AG can file in court to get those same records? They don’t have to wait for Wikileaks. Even your suggestion is a stand down scenario.”
Oh really, huh? They certainly don’t have to wait on Wikileaks and won’t but, as an aside, perhaps you can tell me on what grounds the NY AG would file in court to get those records? You think they can just go to court and ask a judge to give them a subpoena to get those records just because…..? At the very least they would have to open an investigation and even then would have to present a legit reason to the court to get the records. It’s not like a FOIA/public official request.
ks,
I know we are getting our wires crossed.
First off, I am not dismissing the State’s actions because they haven’t been effective in shutting him down or some ‘strange standard’ you’ve applied to the scenario in my name. I am dismissing the rape charges that are bs charges because they will amount to nothing. What is conviction rate for non injury rape in Sweden? Probably close to nil and filed as a result of him being an a** and not some truth warrior.
The State, as in the US hasn’t charged him with anything. And a bunch of Republicans blowing off bs rhetoric for their base isn’t exactly a threat either. You may think it is, but if they/the govt really believed that Assange was indeed worthy of assassination. He would be dead and they WOULD NOT be talking about it on tv. Remember Obama doubled down on that Bush assassination program.
As far as the rest. You can twist my words into whatever you want. I made myself clear on the standing down. If you think there are mass protests and push backs against all those issues and people are standing up against TPTB, then great. There really isn’t much to discuss with you on that front either.
However, I completely disagree that donating a few bucks to Wikileaks or blogging an effective ‘fight the power’ strategy. B of A or any other lender isn’t going to stop the foreclosure fraud horror show because a blogger whines. They certainly aren’t going to stop the wars over a blogger. Bloggers are for our benefit.
Also there is no assumption on whether he had the information at the appropriate time. Assange himself has repeatedly stated he had the information about B of A last year and the financial reform bill was this year. Do the math.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9139180/Wikileaks_plans_to_make_the_Web_a_leakier_place
And my “definite maybe” response isn’t exact an assumption either because it would only be based on the public actually caring enough to push back during the legislation period. Which seemed pretty clear that since Congress didn’t actually reform them on their own, that “definite maybe” was based on the power of the people forcing real reforms due to being angry over the reveals. Oh and the biggest one of all….if Wikileaks released the damned information when it could have made a difference! But here you can read how he claims releasing it months later will exact some reforms. Not sure how that will happen but who knows maybe a committee will ask harsh questions./snark
““It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume,” he said, adding: “For this, there’s only one similar example. It’s like the Enron emails.” ”
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/
And no focusing on Assange/Wikileaks doesn’t miss the point. It is the whole damn point. I am suspicious of them. Nothing tracks logically with them. Frankly, I am not convinced that Wikileaks is actually the truth and justice warrior they claim. They leak stuff we already know. There is NO threat to the establishment leaking information already found online and at all the major news agencies. The govt/state actions are smoke and mirrors at this point. My views are probably best summed up in the questions Cannonfire fires off, because at this point Wikileaks’ leaks supports the govt’s case for attacking Iran. Which makes them worthy of suspicion.
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2010/12/okay-so-just-who-is-this-assange-guy.html
My last comment is awaiting moderation.
But in terms of B of A and they would charge them with? Are you serious? Did you happen to notice the fraud charges filed on them earlier this year? AGs have subpoena powers and probably stacks of complaints that show where to start. The NY AG doesn’t need Wikileaks to file a lawsuit or even start an investigation.
Jerry Brown, CA AG, has even managed to bring lawsuits against banks and mortgage lenders all without Wikileaks.
Hmmm,
I didn’t ask what they would charge them with nor did I say that the AG needed Wikileaks for anything. I asked you on what grounds would the AG file in court to get the records since you apparently believe they can just go to court and ask for them because they really really want them. As I pointed out, even after they open an investigation or file a lawsuit they would STILL have to have a legit reason to ask for the records. If it was as easy as you implied then why haven’t they done it already? I guess they were “standing down” long before Wikileaks entered the fray. The reality is that these cases take time to bring are difficult and time consuming. Hell, they are just now getting around to bringing Repo 105 cases against the carcass of Lehman.
Don’t assign such a lame argument or thought process to me. I am fully aware of how the govt starts a lawsuit. My step-mom is a lawyer FOR the govt.
Anyway, Your sentence here that started this all.
” I’m certainly not twiddling my thumbs waiting for Wikileaks to drop the bomb on the obvious fraud B of A/Merrill, or whoever, perpretrated on their clients and the public though that would be a good thing especially if the NY AG could make a good case with the info.”
Which I said was a stand down scenario, waiting for Wikileaks is ridiculous for an AG. It is in their right to launch an investigation when clear wrong doing has occurred.
As I asked in that last post, did you happen to notice the fraud charges that were filed against them this year? Apparently, you weren’t aware since you tried passing off your ignorance as mine and stated they hadn’t filed any lawsuits.
Here let me help you out.
An article about Jerry Brown and it mentions NY AG Cuomo launching investigations after the collapse. Jerry Brown had a lawsuit ready to go against Wells Fargo last year.
http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2009/04/california_attorney_general_je.html
Here is one where Cuomo is going after B of A for fraud this year.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-04/martin-act-suit-against-ken-lewis-announced-by-cuomo-update1-.html
Here is Ohio’s AG suing B of A for the same fraud over Merrill.
http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2009/04/california_attorney_general_je.html
Here is another two AGs suing B of A.
Arizona and Nevada. And one of the articles discusses the same thing I did. The stacks of complaints is how they start their investigations.
http://www.ktnv.com/story/13723785/inside-the-state-lawsuit-how-bank-of-america-is-deceiving-nevada-homeowners
” “At least 20-percent of the loans in our state are serviced by Bank of America, so the impact is incredible,” says Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto.
After collecting complaints for a year and a half, her office is suing B of A for deceptive trade practices against Nevada homeowners.”
Arizona, another AG manages to find out information without Wikileaks.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/40720088
Well I am in moderation again.
They did file lawsuits. When Ian lets it the post out you see will link after link of AG filing lawsuits against B of A all without Wikileaks.
NY AG filed one against them this year for fraud and Merrill. The Ohio AG filed for the same fraud.
AZ and NV AGs have filed lawsuits against B of A for mortgage fraud.
Jerry Brown filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo during the beginning of last year. Just a few months after the economic crash.
Since I think links are causing the moderation I will repost a small segment of the article which states how they start gathering complaints to know where to start. And look it is EXACTLY how I said such an investigation would start – with complaints.
” “At least 20-percent of the loans in our state are serviced by Bank of America, so the impact is incredible,” says Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto.
After collecting complaints for a year and a half, her office is suing B of A for deceptive trade practices against Nevada homeowners.” “
Hmmm,
I said “….could make a good case with the info.” I suppose the idea that I meant it could help an existing case or a new one never occurred to you. Your strange focus on who is standing down, up or sideways is taking you off the track though your appeal to the step-mom authority is funny.
Btw, I don’t need to google the NY info. It’s splashed across all the papers here when Cuomo has a press conference to announce whatever he’s going to do. But again, it’s getting hilarious how you still don’t understand that despite filing cases and lawsuits, they STILL don’t have the records that Wikileaks might have and release. I guess they can’t just go to court and get them willy nilly, huh? Perhaps you should ask your step-mom for some clarification.
Anyway, this is a tiresome tangent though, as usual, you miss the point. Simply put, any internal B of A/Merrill douments that Wikileaks may release which indicate B of A/Merrill committed fraud is likely to help the NY AG. A lot. Period. All this stuff about “needing” and “standing down” and the rest of it just your odd reasoning.
I’m late, but this statement from myiq2xu is just too much, “I really find it amusing how Sweden has morphed from the model of a socialist democracy to a right-wing dictatorship and U.S. puppet.”
Who ever said it was a model of socialist democracy? Misguided “progressives” who dream of European life after a short vacation there? Sweden has some of the most severe drug laws in the world – especially the developed world – that include jail time for failing a mandatory drug test. (You can be forced to take the test if the police “suspect” drug use, regardless of whether you’re interacting with any other humans…i.e. it’s not about being pulled over and the police thinking you may be intoxicated while driving.) It has a history of helping the US with illegal and extraordinary rendition.
So, let’s talk about that strawman.
Hmmm,
Now I see your post that got out of moderation. Your arguments are contradictory. You try and dismiss Wikileaks with a wave of your hand as nothings and then you castigate them for supposedly not releasing info when it..pause for dramatic effect..it could have made a difference. So which is it? Are they nothings or potential difference makers? But what I’m really interested in is your passage below:
“And no focusing on Assange/Wikileaks doesn’t miss the point. It is the whole damn point. I am suspicious of them. Nothing tracks logically with them. Frankly, I am not convinced that Wikileaks is actually the truth and justice warrior they claim. They leak stuff we already know. There is NO threat to the establishment leaking information already found online and at all the major news agencies. The govt/state actions are smoke and mirrors at this point. My views are probably best summed up in the questions Cannonfire fires off, because at this point Wikileaks’ leaks supports the govt’s case for attacking Iran. Which makes them worthy of suspicion.”
Yes it does. You’re a good example of how it misses the point. Whether you trust or are suspicious or whatever of Assange/Wikileaks is besides the point and doesn’t matter. It’s the government’s actions that you’ve been blithely dismissing as “smoke and mirrors” that matter. You have a bad argument which is why you often resort to silly caricatures like “truth and justice warriors” and whatnot. The whole “trust” issue is just strange. However you fell about Assange personally, the documents Wikileaks publishes are offical government records. It’s not like they’re op-eds. So you don’t trust him? Big deal. That doesn’t change the fact that the documents are offical records.
If what Wikileaks is doing the same stuff as everybody else and stuff we already “know” then why are they and Assange being singled out? After all, you can find the same stuff in the NY Times or online, right? So why all the fuss with Interpol, MC, Visa, death threats and so on?
Well it’s not quite the same…
There is an important difference bewteen, for example, “knowing” that B of A/Merrill committed fraud or somebody writing a great story about it as has been the case in several places and seeing internal documents like emails showing Trader A working with Trader B or memos laying out company policy, etc.
There is an important difference between say, the NY Times writing a story about the government’s actions using annonymus government souces and seeing the actual goverment communications/documents about those events. Wouldn’t it make more sense to trust the actual records and really know what the deal is as opposed to your casual “knowing”? Of course. It may fit the official story or it may not, but at least you will really know.
Finally, with all due respect to Joe and I’m glad he’s back, the ‘Iran” talking point is ridiculous. We have been “attacking” Iran in one form or another since before I was born. From outright CIA medding, to decades of economic sanctions, to overt support of Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war and ongoing threats to nuke them out of existence and on and on. The idea that some of the GOVERNMENT documents that Wikileaks leaked which mentioned Iran represents “support” for our continuing actions, as if Wikileaks was some sort of US policy maker or editorializing, is nonsense.
Anyway, Happy Holidays.
So now drug laws are the litmus test of democracy?
We sure seem to have a lot of litmus tests in this thread.
BTW – I favor the legalization of marijuana and the decriminalization of all drugs.
No. Drug laws are not a litmus test for democracy. It was just an example, given that you axiomatically called Sweden a socialist-democracy paradise. Have you ever even been to Sweden? How do you know the things about Sweden that you claim to know?
Nor was i implying that it is a right-wing totalitarian dictatorship in cahoots with authoritarian elements in the US. (Though there is the record of participating in renditions. You a supporter of illegal renditions of terror suspects? Maybe they’ll teach the next guy who thinks about being at terrorist a lesson.) You’re the one with the litmus tests. You’re the one erecting strawmen left, right and center.
And you’re the one expending loads of energy doing anything but talking about the meat of this issue. If you want to make your case that the whole leak is a giant government conspiracy, make the case. Otherwise, quit acting like the type of person you claim to have changed from, eh?
Psst….It’s called a Devil’s Advocate argument. Taking the other side to prove a point.
If they really are the great and wonderful Oz that wants investigations and reform. Then why didn’t they release the info when it could have made a difference. Like when Congress was taking up the financial legislation?
To me that is another slight against them. Thought that was made clear, but you read it as contradictory as if that is my problem. NO, it is Wikileaks problem. That is the point.
Ugh…won’t bother with the rest. Trying to look behind the curtain is apparently something you don’t do.
ks,
Your views on lawsuits are so far off reality it is bizarre.
If a lawsuit has been filed that means they have ALREADY investigated and received documents to support the lawsuit.