Yet another asinine strawman! If Assange was a genuine JOURNALIST he would be entitled to the 1A protection of the Freedom of the Press. However all he did was a mindless data dump on his Wikileaks site without any meaningful attempt as journalistic integrity or professionalism. That you appear to not grasp the distinction between the various rights in the first amendment says volumes.
You are the one who is harming your own credibility. It is not some big secret that the CIA has done some really nasty things and has been involved in supporting very nasty regimes. Perhaps you think facilitating the transfer of tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology to Al Qaeda was a good thing rather than an evil thing and you are welcome to your opinion. That you are in Denial of this "Factual Reality" because it contradicts your preexisting rigid belief system. Notice that - unlike you - I referring to a specific example of your selective self induced blindness. You on the other hand make accusations with nothing to back those accusations up. (what law of the land did Assange violate - nowhere have I denied any specific claim of violation of a specific law) You on the other hand go running to the playground crying "NO NO NO" when you hear about the well established FACT - that we were involved in arming and supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups in Syria. You then default to "That's a conspiracy" as if this constitutes refutation of the reams of evidence presented to you. It is you who "can't handle the truth". You may distrust politicians but you live in this "Necessary Illusion" bubble that our bureaucratic elite are always some big force for good in the world - acting in the best interests of the US and its citizens - despite the reams of evidence to the contrary. So explain to me how it is that you think arming and supporting the 911 terrorist group Al Qaeda (and others of the same ilk) in Syria was not "Evil".
What is asinine is claiming strawman when you do not understand what a strawman is. The idea that Assange is not involved in Journalism is even more asinine. Claiming that presenting facts and the truth -lacks journalistic integrity and professionalism is preposterous nonsense on steroids.
Some would call such an agency those things. A force for evil. And the CIA has certainly done evil things, like murder, and working to remove another leader from power, in a nation where we have no business meddling. Is meddling in another nation, in the self interests of american corporations, or big banking, evil? Now, sure, meddling on their behalf is considered, "national security interests" but some would believe this to be one helluva stretch. Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is quite educational and revealing, and informs naive americans exactly how the CIA works, using NGOs, and other entities. Are any of these actions evil? A good argument can be made for it. No doubt that an agency like the CIA is essential in this modern world, just in the interest of basic national defense. And we must not forget why the CIA was formed under Truman. It was supposed to be simply an information gathering agency, so that no future american president would be taken by surprise by something like the attack on Pearl Harbor that caught us off guard and not prepared. But it didn't take long for this CIA to be expanded into basically operations that that included military action, killing, and all sorts of things, trying to remove the rulers of other nations. Sometimes it involved protecting big american business interests in those nations, were we were exploiting the resources for profit. Indeed, there are several factual books written on this kind of CIA operation. Is that evil? Some would say yes. While I know something like the CIA is essential, my problem with it comes in when they stomp all over our constitution, and become an agency whose heads will lie to congress under oath in order to keep citizens from knowing the unacceptable things they do in the name of the People. I think the CIA is far too powerful, and unAmerican, and very dangerous. It can turn on a president and as Schumer said, take a president down. Is this evil? To me it sure as hell is. One can see a need for a CIA, while being pissed off at the current CIA and what it has become.
If this country had a democratic republic form of government, our elected officials would not have ended Habeas Corpus. They ended it sometime under Obama, therefore we don't really have that form of government, right?
Are you now denying that AG Sessions filed charges against Assange under Seal? If it was up to me this is what I would be charging Assange with doing; https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798 Now we can deal with your Conspiracy Lala Land allegations regarding the CIA. To begin YOU need to provide CREDIBLE nonpartisan sources for YOUR allegation that the CIA intentionally transferred "tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology to Al Qaeda". There are a lot of other shady things that the CIA has done in the past but to use something as specious as this example just REEKS of DESPERATION. Was the US just supposed to allow the rebels to be SLAUGHTERED by ISIS and the Russian armed Bashir regime because there was a possibility in the fog of war that something MIGHT end up in the wrong hands? Which other US agency should have been supplying the rebels if NOT the CIA? The dept of Agriculture or the EPA perhaps? Exactly what and how much of whatever it was ended up in the hands of rebels with an ALQ affiliation? Can you PROVE that any of that was passed along to ALQ rather than actually being used in the Syrian war zone? Can you PROVE that any other rebel groups NOT affiliated with ALQ but allegedly supplied with "thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology" didn't end up being captured by ISIS and/or the Russian backed Syrian regime? Yes, I know, all of those are IMPOSSIBLE questions to answer for those who believe in Conspiracy theories about the "evil" CIA. Instead the usual ad homs will be the response because that is all any "true believer" can do when faced with those difficult questions. And when I get that predictable response it will just go to prove that I am correct to not waste time on Conspiracy bovine excrement. One last point just to drive home WHY this is Conspiracy bovine excrement. Since when would the Pentagon ever AUTHORIZE the supplying of REBELS with "thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology"? It was a local civil war where the most sophisticated piece of equipment needed to take down Syrian helicopters would have been a good old Stinger Missile that has been around since the early 1980's. Hyperbolic bloviating about the "evil" CIA providing ALQ with "tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology" is the bovine excrement that epitomizes Conspiracy drivel.
So why did he NOT use his alleged journalistic integrity and professionalism when he did those data dumps on Wikileaks? Where did he do anything at all to abide by the laws of nation that he was targeting? Instead he willfully and knowingly violated them thereby PROVING that he has ZERO journalistic integrity and professionalism. That is indisputable FACT!
Had Assange revealed that the CIA was trying to overthrow the Venezuelan government so that Exxon could seize the nation's oil reserves he would be a hero. However what we are discussing here goes to the ORIGINAL INTENT of the formation of the CIA. What Assange did was expose how the CIA goes about gathering information on the internet. Even you must concede that fits the original mandate to keep the nation informed. Harming the core function of the CIA does NOT address any of the other things that the CIA is accused of doing. Neither does it prove that the CIA was engaged in any of those other activities. In essence what Assange did was petty and small minded and failed to take into account what the benefits were of the CIA information gathering role. A genuine journalist would have been able to differentiate between the primary role of the CIA and something that was illegitimate and thereby worthy of exposure. Therein lies the crucial difference that seems to escape those who are using the emotive term "evil" rather than looking at this in a dispassionate and logical manner. The CIA has done things that were wrong and probably still does however that was NOT revealed in the Wikileaks data dump. Assange mindlessly and foolishly exposed the WRONG information about the CIA and therefore Assange is now responsible, accountable and legally liable for his own wrongdoing in this regard.
Please provide credible nonpartisan substantiation to support your allegation that "our elected officials" have "ended Habeas Corpus".
Do u live under a rock? Or maybe you're still in high school and are not aware of what's been happening in Washington DC. Check out the Military Commissions Act under Bush, and then the various amendments to NDAA, National Defense Authorization Acts budgets begun during Obama. Both of those authorize indefinite detention, which is prohibited by Habeas Corpus. Under those laws written by the Congress that loves us, if the Executive Branch invokes the claim of "terrorist", a person can be held forever without trial and without bail.
Puerile ad hom VIOLATIONS of PF Rules duly noted and ignored for derogatory reasons. In other words all you have is the MALFEASANCE committed by the Bush/Cheney regime that Obama inherited and how your beloved BLOTUS is responsible for! Also worth noting that you DISINGENUOUSLY failed to mention that the SCOTUS rebuked the Bush/Cheney regime's denial of Habeas Corpus for US Citizens in the Padilla decision. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/José_Padilla_(prisoner)#Habeas_corpus Please name all of the subsequent instances of US citizens being denied Habeas Corpus rights?
1) You start out with a strawman - I did not deny that Sessions filed charges against Assange. In desperation you have to make up stuff that I did not say and attribute it to me. 2) I already explained to you that information that is already out there - is no longer "Classified - Top Secret". 3) "Al Qaeda/ISIS" - Having no actual knowledge of the situation in Syria- other than the spoon fed propaganda narrative - you to in to a raging fit of ad hom - Demonization of the Messenger - denial and avoidance. First - anyone who knows about the situation in Syria is well aware of Obama's "Moderate Rebel Lie". There was no "moderate rebel" front line. None of the cities were taken over by "moderates". All of the cities were taken over by either Al Qaeda, ISIS (or in a few cases others of the same ilk) Even those who claim that there were moderates in the beginning (such as the defectors - who may well have been Islamists) admit that these disappeared shortly after the war began. The Defense Intelligence Agency does not agree with your assessment according to this declassified document from 2012 - shortly after the war began. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-con...12-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf Then we have Joe Biden contradicting Obama's "Moderate Rebel Lie" https://mideastshuffle.com/2014/10/04/biden-turks-saudis-uae-funded-and-armed-al-nusra-and-al-qaeda/ There number of pro western sources (including the NY-Times, and a gazillion others) have also refuted the nonsensical "moderate rebel lie" that you have been sucked into believing. The FSA - the supposedly "moderate" group was mostly Al Qaeda and ISIS. Later on in Biden's commentary he says ... Obviously Biden does not name the CIA as being involved. The fact of the matter is that it doesn't matter. Sophisticated US technology sold to the Saudis requires and end use certificate. If Biden knew the above - why did we not stop the Saudi's from doing it. The fact of the matter is that we were involved. At least according to the 13 Bipartisan in Congress that tabled the "Stop Arming Terrorist Act". https://gabbard.house.gov/news/StopArmingTerrorists The idea that the Defense Intelligence Agency, Joe Biden, and 13 bipartisan in congress are involved in some "Conspiracy" to smear the Pentagon, CIA and the USA in general is beyond preposterous nonsense. If this were the case do you not think the Media would be all over this like a cat on a mouse ? USE YOUR HEAD. Sorry to burst your "necessary illusion bubble" but - quit shooting the messenger. Not only are these question possible to answer - they have been answered. The above is from our own Gov't "DIRECTLY". We can get into reams of other legitimate sources - people on the ground doing actual reporting and so on. What is also extremely disturbing is the complete MSM silence in order to prop up the Establishment propaganda. Early in the war for example the NY-Times reported on the fact that there were no moderates. (do feel free to ask for the link) In 2014 when our ISIS dog went off its leash and went into Iraq this created a problem. We were in a situation where we were fighting ISIS in Iraq but supporting them in Syria. This is what necessitated the "moderate rebel lie". The NY-Times then quickly forgot its previous reporting - reporting that categorically stated there was no moderates. Rand Paul - on CNN's Sunday morning program "State of the Union" describes the situation well. http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...-my-son-into-that-mess-on-the-crisis-in-iraq/ So here we have a US congressman stating directly that we were arming the 911 Terrorist group. Is this not news ? Clearly not as you are completely oblivious to this fact ? Every major newspaper should have had on the front page "Congressman accuses Obama of arming and supporting 911 Terrorists" and this should have been the lead story on every network editorialized for at least a week or two. But hey - Stormy is far more important. Media response ? Silence .. Crickets. Just the other day the Mitch McConnell Establishment clown was interviewed in relation to Syria - claiming how we have been involved in the fight against ISIS, Al Qaeda in Syria - as if he is completely unaware of the fact that we were the one's supporting and arming these groups - on the same side of the war - like we were not the one's who "CREATED" the problem. What exactly were we doing starting a proxy war in Syria to begin with ? Has that question ever been answered legitimately ? This action has cost the lives of over 500,000 (and counting), caused the refugee crisis which has further spread the plague of Islamist extremism all over the globe, created the modern incarnation of ISIS, and destroyed the country of Syria. Not only that. Syria is a "Secular" Muslim nation. One of the few who allows religious freedoms including Christian Churches. Assad has Christian Generals in his army. Women wear skirts and proper bathing suits - and do not need permission from a man to be educated. There is drinking alcohol and dancing in bars ... and so on. The people of Syria fighting for Assad are fighting to keep these freedoms. The Rebel Opposition wants to take them away. The whole "Call to Jihad" in Syria was on the basis of turning Syria into a strict Sharia state. Why are we on the side of these radical Islamist extremists ? Answer me that. There are many good people in this nation asking this question. Why are you not one of them ? Virginia Senator Thanks Syrian President Bashar Al Assad for Saving the Lives of Christians Open Letter of U.S. Senator Richard H. Black to President Bashar al-Assad Acknowledges US Support to Terrorists Is this what your idea of "Patriotism" is ? - arming and supporting this filth ? I don't think so but if you sit there and claim that Senator Black (who actually went to Syria to see the situation for himself) is peddling "conspiracy" that is what you are guilty of doing - FULL STOP.
continued. So explain this to me - how is it that you have been tricked into supporting the Jihadists ? Now that you know about the "Moderate Rebel Lie" and the fact that indeed we did arm and support this filth - perhaps you will get your head out of the sand, wake up, and smell the flatus and get your head out of the "necessary illusion" bubble in which you live. "We are in a Global war against Terror" (which is why we need to spend over 1 Trillion/year on "Total" Military spending and defending the Homeland. If this is true, then why have we become - in conjunction with El Saud - the #1 State sponsor of terrorism ? If the CIA is this great force for good - as you claim - then why are they arming and supporting the most nasty and vile Islamist extremists to fight against people who are fighting back to maintain their freedoms ? Why have our intelligence agencies (our intelligence agencies creating and disseminating propaganda on US citizens was legalized in 2013) along with the MSM propaganda arm of the State - been feeding you all these lies and false narratives for so many years ?
Puerile behavior describes many of your posts here DT, and your general tone posting. I'm curious, but not surprised, that you did not comment on the successive NDAA amendments. You asked for examples, and I provided them. The editable Wikipedia can be a handy tool for propagandists according to some. Sounds plausible.
Yet another ranting screed loaded with puerile strawman allegations! The ONUS is entirely on YOU to PROVE those bovine excrement allegations of yours by providing quotations from my posts! You can't because they don't exist!
Your fallacious Conspiracy beliefs are NOT my problem and I am under no obligation whatsoever to waste my time responding to your baseless asinine strawman allegations. Have a nice day!
You had exactly ONE example that had already been DEBUNKED and REBUKED by the courts! Onus is entirely on YOU to PROVE that Wikipedia has been incorrectly edited. That you persist in spewing puerile ad homs is NOT my problem either since you are only downgrading your own credibility.
I did prove the allegations in the post you are responding to. Rather than address the evidence, all you have done is gone into a fit of raging denial telling me to prove what has been proven in the post you are responding to. The Defense Intelligence Agency, the Vice President along with numerous bipartisan members of congress all state that there were no moderate rebels of any significance and that we were supporting and arming Al Qaeda/ISIS. I realize that this information is too much for you to handle as it completely destroys the necessary illusion bubble in which you live but, demonizing the messenger will not change reality.
Yet another attempt at idiotic analogies. Perhaps we should've dispatched the nearest FBI agents to Benghazi, or something. Christ. https://www.vox.com/2015/10/12/9489389/benghazi-explained
Failure to actually read and/or comprehend what I actually wrote duly noted for the record. You made STRAWMAN ALLEGATIONS about me in your ranting screed! I asked you to SUBSTANTIATE those bogus allegations about me with links to my posts! That you DEFLECTED was either poor reading comprehension or embarrassment at being exposed for posting strawman fallacies. Either way it doesn't matter since it only harmed your credibility, not mine!
It is not a "strawman" if it is true. What claims would you like me to substantiate ? I have given concrete examples and all you have done is avoid responding to those examples - and talked over them with ad hom fallacy. "What Claims" would you like me to substantiate ? The fact of the matter is that my claims were all substantiated in the posts - or previous posts - in which they were made.
