Ignorant Wikileaks Hackers Take Down Visa/Mastercard Site....

Try again, nothing to do with the other thread, this is an entirely DIFFERENT angle you brought up yourself.

So you admit you are a hypocrite then? or are you just an idiot that doesn't actually understand what WikiLeaks is and can't explain how you RE-posting that information is any different to what WikiLeaks does?

Here, let me explain. It DISTRIBUTES information that is given to it. It doesn't go hacking computers to find it. The information is given to them to REPORT on, just like you did REPOSTING that information. EXCEPT the information YOU JUST PROVIDED tells us how to commit a crime whereas if WikiLeaks had it, they would have REDACTED the bit that had the info on how to commit a crime. Seriously, you're falling on your own sword.

 

Dude you are pathetic, I posted an piece of the story and link as a source you moron. Everyone here knows my stance on wikileaks, you must be deeply hurt with me calling you a disgrace to your country, to try and say I am pro wikileaks by posting the source of the story

Do yourself a favor and take a week off these threads, I think you had enough...

~ Shakes Head ~

 

Are you seriously this stupid? You are an absolute tosser. Nothing to do with what you think of me because I seriously don't care. YOU SIMPLY CAN'T SEE THAT YOU DID EXACTLY WHAT WIKILEAKS DOES, NO IN FACT WORSE BECAUSE YOUR REPOST CONTAINED INSTRUCTIONS INCITING OTHERS TO COMMIT A CRIME, BUT YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE. You just absolutely change the topic to a different one and try to turn the tables, avoiding the actual point - WHERE DID I SAY YOU SUPPORT WIKILEAKS? I SAID YOU DID EXACTLY WHAT THEY DO - YOU CAN'T DEFEND YOURSELF AGAINST THAT so you move into some name calling and rhetoric. An ABSOLUTE TOSSER THAT MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL!!!

 

And if VISA/MasterCard do not wish to support terrorism -- that is their right.

 

I agree with that, a business should have final desicion of who it does business with, within the confines of the law.

I don't support efforts to discredit PayPal either, because i think they all had no choice in the matter. They were asked by your government to shut them down and they did. End of.

I don't believe WikiLeaks is a 'supporter' of terrorism as your analogy suggests.

 

Latest is the paypal API has been hacked

 

Clearly you disapprove of namecalling, as well as people that do exactly that for which they condemn others.

Nice glimpse at the maturity level of an Assange supporter. Might wanna get that capslock fixed (and maybe your irony alarm).

 

Once you open the door to it, by starting the name calling, then it's surely my right to hit straight back, or is your vision I should sit back and take it, just like Jesus would?

 

So by that logic, the US government is perfectly justified in using criminals to commit criminal acts against Assange, so long as they don't commit the criminal acts directly. After all, your argument in Assange's defense is that he didn't personally steal the data, he just facilitated the distribution of stolen information to the harm of the US government.

I think I can live with your logic on this one. Pay the mob to kill Assange. Great idea, thanks.

 

No, the government has no right to touch Assange, he stole nothing. He is merely passing on information he has been given, same as any reporter does. We commit worse anytime we copy/paste from another site. That's stealing. He was given it.

You've shown you're absolute hypocrites here, where freedom of speech and truth is the enemy of the right-wing. I can only hope you get over the embarrassment of this event soon and return to real America we all love where truth, honesty & integrity was the norm. More Americans need to stand up for truth now more than ever because the focus is squarely on your country right now and the world is paying extra attention. If you all have this attitude, and we all see that, then America will lose support from its current friends, allies & neighbours. A big shame there's only the regular 'right-wingers' adding to this conversation.

 

They are a plague, where reasoning for them remains the same (dead end) no matter whatever the subject.

 

Yeah, if we kiss up to a guy committing extortion while publishing stolen classified docs we we'll earn the respect of the world.

How old are you?

 

Yes, I now understand why you speak in esoteric terms to them. If they aren't going to understand the basic principles of life that we all must aspire to, in good ol' plain English, it might as well be Japanese.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods

Any other clever legal advice? I still like your principal of reciprocity. The US should simply deliver money and information to some non-government entity that wants to kill Assange. They won't plan the hit or pull the trigger. They will simply make a business transaction. It will be some bad person who commits a crime, not the US. I rather like your fairy tale view of how things work. It seems we can justify just about anything.

Group hug girls. Congratulations Breeze, you found someone who understands what you are saying! They say there's a seat for every ass. I think you just found yours.

 

So if you steal IBM's intellectual property -- say the plans for their newest CPU -- and give it to me... I get to keep it, use it, sell it, give it away, whatever I want. After all, I didn't steal it.

Or, let's say I go to your house and steal your television. I then sell it to my fence. Now it's his. Legal, right? Err... no. That's not legal. He's in deep legal doo doo.

Some terms that might help this conversation: receiving stolen property, aiding and abetting, accessory after the fact, ...

 

The roundups have begun. The morons who decided to participate in the DDoS attacks are now being identified and prosecuted. They should give them all some flavor of a darwin award for stupidity.

 

C'mon Will.Spencer, I thought you had 'some' logic and knew a little about the law. You can not sell it without breaking the law but you can give it to the local paper who will reproduce it to claim the scoop, same as any big story. Remember Watergate? The reporter gets the goods on a company and makes a decision on what he's gonna publish.

You're sounding as ridiculous as Obamanation by using cunning analogies but not related to the point in order to make a case. You used the word 'sell' many times but there is no selling involved here and that's where the legal side of things fall down and why the USA is having a hard time finding a charge that could stick. The information he obtained from his source is freely distributed to anyone at no cost. You might notice the record companies don't prosecute people who give songs to their friends. You need to SELL the stuff to get in trouble with the law. Ooops, have I just given away a trade secret?

Can you say rock & hard place? I just read a story that makes me think the US doesn't have a clue what to do. Apparently their best bet is to get Julian direct from UK so indeed they must not have anything they can stick on him that won't affect Mr Murdoch and the rest of the media moguls. Link

 

So, what is your point? The gov'ts involved have all had plenty of time to arrest the culprit - why haven't they or your analogy like the rest of the above is just hyperboly in disregard for the actual laws that have not been violated.

Written through time and experience against the whims of emotions - such as exposing the Holocaust being the same as your arguments of stolen property, aiding and abetting, accessory after.... as applicable for Nazi-Germany in silencing its media using the same narrowness and disregard for independent analysis the laws are written to prevent - is why he is not arrested.

The content of the material is not the objective of the laws but the rights for independent analysis. The gov'ts are culpable to those who are exposed by the gov't documents not the documents themselves.

 

It is immaterial whether you accept monetary compensation or not. If I steal your TV and give it away to a bum on the street, it's still stolen property. I get charged with theft and the vagrant gets charged with receiving stolen property.

Review the PirateBay decision. They didn't steal any songs. Hell, unlike WiliLeaks, the PirateBay boys didn't even host any stolen information. All they did was host links to torrents stored on other compiters.

And yes, the record companies do prosecute even if there is no commercial intent. For fun, review the smittenedkitten filing.

 

Just because its against the law or there's a court judgement against something doesn't make it wrong. Few years back being homosexual was punishable and racism was abetted by courts and laws, that didn't make homosexuality wrong or racism right. Just because you picked a side without considering the other doesn't mean that you have to defend it to the extent of making yourself look silly.

There's no parallel between making a private citizens intellectual property public and making a people's governments policies public. You are either too stupid or being dishonest with yourself.