A communist believes in communal ownership. I am a staunch advocate of property rights. If you wanted evidence for The Saint being an authoritarian statist, this post says it all: http://wordforge.net/showpost.php?p=2006268&postcount=125
Yeah, the fuck you're not. You're not a Commie like the Pope ain't a chomo-hidin' fuck. Tell us some more lies, you Red cunt.
That's a post referring to government performing one of its only legitimate functions, which is to shield the citizenry it represents against foreign threats to life and livelihood. That is Libertarian, since you obviously can't even be bothered to do enough research to fake living up to the title you gave yourself, you lying cockport.
Just to clarify for you, Cupcake, you pathologically dishonest piece of shit: Libertarianism is about minimal government. Anarchism is about no government -- but what you advocate, frequently and consistently, is a situation which would require global and authoritarian government. That is why you are NOT a Libertarian.
[Better than voting with their wallets] You clearly place the use of state force over the forces of the free market. It is you who does not understand the nature of libertarianism, Danny.
Delaware, stop reporting posts with bullshit justifications and only against people you want punished. It's the Red Room...suck it up or go post in the Green Room.
REALLY!? I wasn't going to respond, because I thought you were just countertrolling my obvious countertroll of an obvious troll. You really took that weak bait?
Have you considered that by reporting your countertroll of my troll I was, in fact, trolling Tamar, whose swallowing of my bait provided me with a further opportunity to follow up on that troll and in doing so to accomplish my actual countertroll of your countertroll of my obvious troll? Besides, we're friends IRL. I wouldn't want to get you in real trouble.
Sure you want that? then all the stuff in the creep will get into the ground, into the environment, into the food chain.....:santa_huh: Gotta have him do something else that won't contaminate the rest of us.:santa_undecided:
I don't have any money to do so right now, but likely will after Christmas. Ron Paul said it best. http://twitter.com/RepRonPaul/status/10716266021003264
I find myself torn on wikileaks - on the one hand I'm all for transparency, and seeing any governments rotten heart thrust in the publics eye pleases me. On the other hand, I'm well aware it affects our security. On the whole though, I'm with Ben Franklin - "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety" - and I think knowing what the little shits lording it over us are up to comes under 'essential liberty'
I continue to donate whatever I can. Those calling for the assassination of Assange should be tried for incitement to commit murder. However, should such an assassination occur, it will not shut Wikileaks down, and it will result in the keys to the notorious insurance files being released. Freedom of speech means nothing unless it includes freedom for those with whom you disagree.
I also am sorta in Wikileaks corner. Neo-cons complain about how the leaks "endanger" American lives and undermine American foreign policy, yet no one thinks how the government does more to endanger American lives by involving us in useless wars and by enacting a blundering and arrogant foreign policy. Wikileaks is NOT the enemy. The US government is. Wikileaks has done the American people a great public service in pulling back the screen so we see what the Wizard is really up to. Anything that does damage to the State and exposes the murderous activities of any government is a good thing. A bonus is listening to Hannity and Limbaugh fling spit all over their studios, and waiting for their heads explode.
It also does a job of separating the internet libertarians from those of us happy to display our minarchist badges in public. I could get behind complaints of certain information being leaked endangering troops, or even those who've helped us in our conflicts, but the leaks as a whole? For a board whose genesis was about freedom, our colours sure do run pale IRL.
You're letting your dislike of Hannity and Limbaugh and their ilk confuse your discrimination of the portion of what Wiki is doing that is good. Assange is supporting traitors with cash - that's treason, pure and simple. If (and that's a mighty big if in this case) there's a whistleblower who's releasing something that really needs to be put out then that's freedom of speech and should be encouraged. Paying someone for a mass dump of info and managing to find a few nuggets that happen to "prove" you're on a virtuous mission is hardly proof that your original motives were worthy. That's equivalent to letting the cops raid your house without a warrant and rifle through all your stuff. If they happen to find something, anything, by this reasoning they're then allowed to haul you away to jail and the original illegal search was completely justified. Sorry, pal, but it doesn't work that way.
"Freedom of speech does not give you the right to scream 'fire' in a crowded theater." "Diplomacy is the art of saying 'good doggie' until you can find a rock." By taking away the ability of diplomats to say to their boss "the n Koreans are being douchebags and the Chinese aren't helping" (or whatever), you cripple a nation's ability to execute an effective foreign policy. I mean, granted, it isn't like Obama has an effective foreign policy, but the point remains.
Actually, Diplomacy is the art of being able to tell someone to go to Hell in such a way that they'll look forward to the trip.
If the Chinese can still chat to us Brits after we turned their Summer Palace into kindling, can handle the likes of Prince Phillip and his slitty eye style comments, then I'm pretty sure the outfall from discovering some nasty words being said about them will be fairly small. I'm pretty sure the phrase "if you think that's bad, you should hear what we say about you!" will be getting bandied about
And damn near every post he puts up proves what you know wrong. That means either he is a left-winger or he pretends to be one because he's a filthy little masochist who enjoys being insulted for being a little commie faggot who should go throw himself into a composter, ya dig?
If I were cool with the wikileaks releases, which I think I am, then I'd also be cool with any/all responsible parties experiencing any foreseeable consequences of their actions, which e.g. for the Private might be never again seeing the light of day, and for Assange to become ex-Assange within a year or so.
Happily, Assange has been offered asylum in both Paraguay and Venezuela. Plans to murder him would stand less chance of success if he were to take either offer. As regards the "rape" allegations, those are trumped up at the very least. The definition of "rape" in Sweden is very wide, and includes all types of "sexual misconduct". Assange is alleged to have had consensual sex, which then became a matter of dispute afterwards seeing as he hadn't worn a condom and refused to have tests for STD's done. See below links. http://www.fastcompany.com/1707146/...surprise-but-the-internet-thinks-hes-a-rapist http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/02...the-swedes-are-making-it-up-as-they-go-along/