United States Corrupt Twattery

[Scouse]

It's climate change activists trying to depopulate.

 

[BloodOmen]

The house is about to go GOP so I’m not sure how far this will go.

Far hopefully. The Republicans want Trump gone - perfect opportunity for them to get shot of him for good.

 

[BloodOmen]

Another big shooting over there. I wonder if enough will ever be enough?

No meaningful regulations that's for sure. They all keep using the amendment to bear arms as an excuse to own firearms... silly fuckers don't seem to understand that amendment means it can be changed.

Automatic weapons have no place in public hands. If it's for hunting then a rifle or shotgun is more than sufficient - home defence? shotgun or pistol.

Other than that, there is no valid reason to own automatic weapons as the public - even those going "But we need to defend ourselves against the goverment!" please, if it ever came to civil war again who is the smart money on? sure as hell isn't on Hill billies in pickup trucks, its on trained army personal with modern hardware.

 

[Scouse]

if it ever came to civil war again large parts of the army would likely defect rather than shoot their own families wholesale

FTFY

 

[Wij]

So it will come down to who owns the tanks, warplanes, missiles and UAVs. Assault rifles will be irrelevant.

 

[Wij]

Also, defending yourself against the government is not a constitutional reason for owning firearms and is nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Sedition for any reason is explicitly unconstitutional.

 

[DaGaffer]

Also, defending yourself against the government is not a constitutional reason for owning firearms and is nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Sedition for any reason is explicitly unconstitutional.

Americans routinely freight the 2nd Amendment with all kinds of stuff that isn't there (and conveniently ignore stuff that is); in this case it's all that well-known slave shagger Thomas Jefferson's fault; "The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants" etc. It's amazing how many Americans seem to think this is the point of gun ownership.

 

[Scouse]

So it will come down to who owns the tanks, warplanes, missiles and UAVs. Assault rifles will be irrelevant.

Makes you wonder why armies have them if tanks and missiles can do the whole job

 

[Wij]

Americans routinely freight the 2nd Amendment with all kinds of stuff that isn't there (and conveniently ignore stuff that is); in this case it's all that well-known slave shagger Thomas Jefferson's fault; "The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants" etc. It's amazing how many Americans seem to think this is the point of gun ownership.

Yep, but at no point in the constitution did it say that if enough hillbillies with mullets gather together and whine hard enough then this document will cease to be applicable

 

[Wij]

Makes you wonder why armies have them if tanks and missiles can do the whole job

It’s not saying that they can do the whole job. It’s saying that the side without them will lose.

 

[Scouse]

It’s not saying that they can do the whole job. It’s saying that the side without them will lose.

See my original FTFY post to Blood.

 

[Wij]

See my original FTFY post to Blood.

Hence my original reply to that.

 

[Scouse]

Hence my original reply to that.

It’s not saying that they can do the whole job. It’s saying that the side without them will lose.

Both sides will have them in a civil war - as large parts of the army will defect.

 

[Wij]

Both sides will have them in a civil war - as large parts of the army will defect.

Maybe, in which case it would be those that are decisive, not the assault rifles held by rednecks, as per my point.

 

[Scouse]

• The New York Times
• Le Monde
• The Guardian
• Der Spiegel
• El Pais

All think Wikileaks is a legitimate publishing entity, that Assange committed no crime and the current prosecution is a "direct attack on media freedom".

Obama said he wouldn't prosecute, Biden was vice-president at the time.

This is their combined letter:


Twelve years ago, on November 28th 2010, our five international media outlets – the New York Times, the Guardian, Le Monde, El País and Der Spiegel – published a series of revelations in cooperation with WikiLeaks that made the headlines around the globe.


“Cablegate”, a set of 251,000 confidential cables from the US state department, disclosed corruption, diplomatic scandals and spy affairs on an international scale.

In the words of the New York Times, the documents told “the unvarnished story of how the government makes its biggest decisions, the decisions that cost the country most heavily in lives and money”. Even now in 2022, journalists and historians continue to publish new revelations, using the unique trove of documents.

For Julian Assange, publisher of WikLeaks, the publication of “Cablegate” and several other related leaks had the most severe consequences. On April 12th 2019, Assange was arrested in London on a US arrest warrant, and has now been held for three and a half years in a high-security British prison usually used for terrorists and members of organised crime groups. He faces extradition to the US and a sentence of up to 175 years in an American maximum-security prison.

This group of editors and publishers, all of whom had worked with Assange, felt the need to publicly criticise his conduct in 2011 when unredacted copies of the cables were released, and some of us are concerned about the allegations in the indictment that he attempted to aid in computer intrusion of a classified database. But we come together now to express our grave concerns about the continued prosecution of Julian Assange for obtaining and publishing classified materials.


The Obama-Biden administration, in office during the WikiLeaks publication in 2010, refrained from indicting Assange, explaining that they would have had to indict journalists from major news outlets too. Their position placed a premium on press freedom, despite its uncomfortable consequences. Under Donald Trump however, the position changed. The DoJ relied on an old law, the Espionage Act of 1917 (designed to prosecute potential spies during world war one), which has never been used to prosecute a publisher or broadcaster.

This indictment sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine America’s first amendment and the freedom of the press.

Obtaining and disclosing sensitive information when necessary in the public interest is a core part of the daily work of journalists. If that work is criminalised, our public discourse and our democracies are made significantly weaker.

Twelve years after the publication of “Cablegate”, it is time for the US government to end its prosecution of Julian Assange for publishing secrets.

Publishing is not a crime.

The editors and publishers of:
The New York Times
The Guardian
Le Monde
Der Spiegel
El País

 

[Wij]

This is a brave journalist:


View: https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1598067888791113728


Someone who doxes dissidents so that they can be executed is just a cunt to me.

 

[Wij]

Did Putin Astroturf the Libertarian Ron Paul Revolution?

Ron Paul’s campaign manager was recently convicted of funneling Russian money to Trump. Russia has long had an interest in Paul’s political movement.

www.thedailybeast.com

No surprise. The Ron Paul Institute website is basically just RT content re-badged.

 

[Wij]

Fucking hell. Elon is just another GOP misinformation propagandist now. His new bombshell that he ‘discovered’ about twitter is that the Biden government abused its power to force twitter to take down tweets that showed Hunter Biden in a bad light.

Only it happened when Trump was still in power. Before the election even. And the tweets were Hunters dick pics. Posted by someone else, against his will so clearly a violation of twitters policy against revenge porn amongst others.

Elon must know this. He’s just Rudy Giuliani now. I expect to see him holding a press conference at a landscaping centre any day now


View: https://twitter.com/ParkeBench/status/1598841731763810304

 

[Wij]

And laundering it through well-known Russian prostitute and drug user and Putin shill Matt Taibbi is just utterly on point *chefs kiss*

 

[Scouse]

Wowzers. Just properly wowzers.


View: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-63832899


Watch the video.

Then realise that Daniel Ellsberg has implicated himself for the same "crime" that Julian Assange is fighting extradition for. Live on TV to the beeb.

Whaddaya think @Wij? (Or anyone). That's how you stand on a principle. You put your own freedom on the line in a challenge to the state.

 

[Scouse]

Damn 'rona, wrong thread. @Jupitus or @MYstIC G - mind sticking it in the wanky american thread please?

 

[Ormorof]

Wowzers. Just properly wowzers.


View: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-63832899


Watch the video.

Then realise that Daniel Ellsberg has implicated himself for the same "crime" that Julian Assange is fighting extradition for. Live on TV to the beeb.

Whaddaya think @Wij? (Or anyone). That's how you stand on a principle. You put your own freedom on the line in a challenge to the state.

He was charged and went to court over it, and charges were dismissed. So they can hardly just charge him again at this point 50 years later

 

[Wij]

That wasn't all he was charged with. Happy to see what sticks:

Indictment and arrest of Julian Assange - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Wij]

(Courts or GTFO?)

 

[Scouse]

He was charged and went to court over it, and charges were dismissed. So they can hardly just charge him again at this point 50 years later

Interesting to see the logical flips and twists that people do to maintain their hatred.

Daniel Ellsberg has not been charged with the wikileaks conspiracy. This interview is him putting his hands up and shouting at the state "hey! I'm guilty of this too - so if you're charging Assange you should be charging me too - come and have a go if you think you're hard enough"

My position has always been that Assange is a cunt but what he did was legal. It appears that Ellsberg and my positions, at least on legality, align perfectly.

Of course, they've scattergunned the charges for assange (and the corrupt democrats have bailed on Obamas promise to drop the charges) - so they'll get him on something (and @Wij will wank hard that day (I notice you've totally avoided the Ellsberg question @Wij - because there's zero wiggle room for you)).

But the wikileaks dump of information was 100% a good thing. It is protected under the constitution and Ellsberg's public challenge is a challenge to not only the US government (which is enough in itself) but also a "fuck you" to anyone who thinks the wikileaks action was wrong.

 

[Scouse]

(Courts or GTFO?)

Clearly unconstitutional. Charges should be dropped. You support a states oppressive abuse of courts in silencing vital public-interest information sharing. On this - because if your hatred of a man - you stand firmly against the freedom of the press and against the major news organisations you often turn to when you're making an argument yourself.

Your position is indefensible m8.

 

[Wij]

Clearly unconstitutional. Charges should be dropped. You support a states oppressive abuse of courts in silencing vital public-interest information sharing. On this - because if your hatred of a man - you stand firmly against the freedom of the press and against the major news organisations you often turn to when you're making an argument yourself.

Your position is indefensible m8.

I said there were other charges besides the Espionage Act whose constitutionality could be decided by the Supreme Court as part of the case. Soliciting hacks is not a 1A issue. Assisting fugitives to escape the law is not a 1A issue. Let's see what the courts say.

 

[Scouse]

I said there were other charges besides the Espionage Act whose constitutionality could be decided by the Supreme Court as part of the case. Soliciting hacks is not a 1A issue. Assisting fugitives to escape the law is not a 1A issue. Let's see what the courts say.

Yeah yeah. That's all you've got left isn't it.

It ignores the fact that what is legal and what is "justice" are two very different concepts. You're not after Justice - and not interested in the public interest defence (which is crystal clear here - the dump of files is still being used today to shine light on wholesale corruption).

He'd have been "banged to rights" by now in Blighty because of the despicable "Official Secrets Act" - which makes America a better place than the UK. And you'd be totally happy with that. I don't understand the snake that's writhing in your stomach over this man when it's clear that, despite being a wanker, he's done an enormous amount of good for us all.

 

[Embattle]

I was perfectly happy to send him to America many years ago when he lost his extradition case, I'm still fine now to send him.

 

[old.Osy]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/19/look-time-tucker-carlson-asked-hunter-biden-favor/