Yeah BoA just announced that they were gonna stop processing WL's transactions or some shit. lol this is hilarious.
Printable View
Yeah BoA just announced that they were gonna stop processing WL's transactions or some shit. lol this is hilarious.
WL tweeted a couple days ago that everyone that uses Bank of America should close their account and migrate to a "more secure" bank. Lol... Wonder what's gonna happen?
Man i don't know but I sure as hell can't wait to find out.
I'll get the popcorn.
There is probably money to be made here. I'm off to buy up all of the domains in the form of "(seniorExecName)PlooksAntelope.com". They couldn't have bought those yet. Step 3, profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reddit.com
I'm stoked to see what's going to happen to BoA.
We can dream.
So the U.N. is formallly investigating the torture allegations on Bradley Mannings treatment.
Damn America. Is this how we do our political prisoners?Quote:
Originally Posted by Article
Not being able to sleep between 5am and 8pm? Sounds like every day of my life. Boo fucking hoo.
Didn't we blare music and the Howard Stern Show at Manuel Noriega in Panama? THAT'S TORTURE!
Let's get serious. Mancow for Manning.
For your consideration:
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddit.com
Damn that article was good.
This should be getting more attention. Wired is clearly protecting Lamo
Wired sucks all the dicks.
What's going on in that article? It's written as a follow up to something about Wired chatlogs. I have no idea what he's talking about.
First, read the Salon article from June. Then the Wired response. Then the Salon article from last week. Then the Wired response. Then the Salon article from today... etc.
I remember reading Frances Townsend on CNN.com after she left the Bush Administration. She was always on hand to defend whatever odious, fascist legislation or policy the Bush administration wanted. She's exactly the type of power-worshipping bootlicker any authoritarian government needs plenty of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerozero
BTW Greenwald got a nice dig in on CNN at around the 5:20 mark. "maybe CNN doesn't do this but good journalists..."
The reaction to Assange pointing out the Emperor has no clothes is astonishing.
It's more than protection. It's more extreme than that -- they're propagating his lies. (at least, that's how they stand without the proof to back it up)Quote:
Originally Posted by dave is ok
This is all a master plan by the Government, and you're all falling right into it!
tldr on the Wired stuff. Cliffsnotes?
It's kind of complicated. But the basic gist is that Some hacker guy, Adrian Lamo, has a writer at Wired that is totally gay for him. Lamo uses him for publicity and the writer, Poulson, has written about him a dozen times over the last decade. Somehow, said hacker guy gets information from Pvt. Manning about what he did in stealing the 250k cables and Apache video. Lamo turns him in, gives Wired chatlogs and whatnot. Wired publishes 25% of the chat logs and refuses to publish the rest, while Lamo is telling the NY Times and other news places stuff that supposedly was said but not published in the logs. Contradicts himself repeatedly. Wired refuses to confirm or deny whether any of the stuff is actually in the logs and attacks Salon writer for even questioning a.) the weird relationship between Lamo and Poulsen, b.) the remaining 75% of the logs, c.) glaring inconsistencies
http://gambit.mit.edu/updates/Freedom.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Nash
http://lparchive.org/Metal-Gear-Soli...s2_110_1c8.jpg
So the hacker guy turned the leaker in and he's friends with a guy from Wired? Aside from that being a bullshit move, what's the problem?
The problem lays with the claims of the hacker about Pvt. Manning. He's telling mishmashed stories all over the news, often contradicting himself. Glenn Greenwald (from the Salon) says Wired should release the remaining 75% of the chat logs (censoring private personal data, of course) to verify if what Lamo is saying is actually true instead of letting him smear Pvt. Manning without actually checking the truthfulness of his claims.
They are refusing. Greenwald says he's suspicious and believes the claims are not true. That's where we are right now. He's pressuring them to release the logs or flush their journalistic credibility down the shitter.
Wired has no journalistic integrity. I never took anything they said seriously. Keep talking about animu, buddies.
That may be so but they're still using what audience they have to spread information with no factual backing right now. Factual backing they allegedly "have".
Pay no attention, bad media goes away.
It is actually kind of funny that Wired is acting like a nerdy internet girl getting caught in her own shit.
"people totally said things on chat and they hate you"
"prove it"
"duuur, no, that would be rude"
How much of a martyr does he think he can be, while simultaneously acting out the worst-case scenario proposed by his detractors? WikiLeaks-style openness of information will be a deader dream post-Assange than it was before WikiLeaks existed.
Sorry to those of you who support his cause, but your flagbearer is an unstable egomaniac.
Every politician is.
"sensible" people probably wouldn't put this information out there. They'd realize death kind of sucks, and double so for the kind of death governments request for those that would deface them.
No, sensible and reasonable people don't really want any part of that. They're too busy working normal jobs and raising kids.
Good point.
It is one of the fundamental problems with the character of man. The same thing that makes you do abnormal things that need to be done, often makes you a weirdo or ass.
This is not a fundamental problem if you don't give a shit what people think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fe 26
It is a problem when people stop being polite and stop tolerating you.
Like, when the government has you killed, or put in a hole to rot.
No man is an island.
RealWorldCast.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Fe 26
WikiLeaks: Julian Assange 'faces execution or Guantánamo detention' This is pretty wild I don't really think the US government would execute him, would they?
No, it's just his lawyers using the same paranoid hyperbole he uses.
...which happens to be the same brand of paranoid hyperbole the nutjobs in the american media and government use...
The only people who seem to be calling for his death are people who have no authority to make it happen.
The headline is a bit of melodrama, but, of course, his legal staff is correct in their assertion that this is politicallt motivated prosecution of dubious merit, which is reason enough to be scared of their real motives.
If I was Assange I would be fucking scared shitless of even looking in the US' direction. This country has proven, over and over, that it has absolutely zero problem with locking up whoever it feels like as long as it feels like and doing whatever the fuck it feels like to them - including torture. Stuff like evidence, proof, due process, habeas corpus, and jury trials are ultimately irrelevant in this process.
Would they do it to Assange? I dunno, would you risk it if you were in his shoes?
edit: plus, the debate in the mainstream press has pretty much revolved around whether or not the US government should find some trumped up charges to arrest him on, or just shoot him instead. It's a very hostile environment for him and he would have little sympathy among the public.
Yeah I don't really believe they would do it. But his lawyers are smart in using the fact that some pretty important people have said that he should be put to death in their favor. It's a lot of sensationalism coming from both sides but it seems like Assange is using it to his advantage...or at least trying to.
Does the average person really have a problem with the guy?
I don't live in the states, but all of the americans I know don't seem to have a problem with the guy, aside from him being a bit of a douche.
We should make the government bigger, and give it a stronger say in our health care decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Big government is a necessary evil unless you like the idea of banks and monster corporations running everything.
Because they totally don't now.
Right, because they dwarf the government and actually draft a significant amount of the legislation that the government passes.
The way things work now, individual liberty is trampled on while the right of corporations to run amok unregulated is paramount.
So, let's have the gov't run our individual liberties?Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
My brother told me last that the reason they're claiming he might be put to death is because most European countries aren't allowed to extradite someone to a country where they might be put to death. Which makes sense why they're sensationalizing that aspect of the US reaction. If it's true, I don't really have a source for that.
The best thing he can do right now is be loud and get attention. Fame is the only real protection this man has. If he was a quiet no name, he'd probably already be dead and we wouldn't be talking about this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anal Kaboom
I'm suggesting the opposite. Regulate the fuck out of industry and leave the individual citizen the fuck alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
This is so dumb. Big government goes hand-in-hand with big business. Small government doesn't. And I don't believe that regulation isn't evil at all times. It is simply a tool that needs to be used properly or else won't be effective in its job. Some things should be and some things shouldn't (oil and natural resources, for example, should)Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
No you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
Government of any size can be corrupt and inefficient.Quote:
Big government goes hand-in-hand with big business. Small government doesn't.
So you believe it's always evil, but it's just a tool?Quote:
And I don't believe that regulation isn't evil at all times. It is simply a tool that needs to be used properly or else won't be effective in its job.
I guess that's one way of looking at it.
Ya don't say.Quote:
Some things should be and some things shouldn't
Those things should exist, yes. Why wouldn't they, and what does that have to do with anything?Quote:
(oil and natural resources, for example, should)
A small government is harder to corrupt because there are less cogs to cause a problem. It also costs the people it's supposed to aid (not govern) much less. Keeping the money flowing from government and in to the hands of its citizens. Bureaucracy favors the lazy and corrupt, after all. As for that anti-regulation statement above - I made a typo. I meant to say: "And I don't believe that regulation is evil at all times." (I said ISN'T instead). Oil and natural resources should be regulated. Heavily. One of the industries that need it.
I also believe corporations have too much power to absolve themselves of legal and moral trouble. But then again... any ordinary citizen can incorporate and run the same game. I do it.
why not just do an LLC?
I knew it was a typo, I was just being an ass. ;) That last bit was also just poking fun at you're choice of words, by the way. The joke was a lot more obvious when I was high.
Anyway, I think maybe 'big government' isn't the right term for what I had in mind. Bloated bureaucracies are indeed a bad thing, but it would take a lot of the manpower and funding to keep tabs on increasingly enormous and powerful corporations. I'm not suggesting some top-heavy bureaucracy, just more people to enforce regulations and monitor for compliance, and a well-funded and accountable group of people to formulate policy. It would be ideal if regulatory agencies did all of their own research and never relied on the information and analysis that trade organizations provide them with.
can we not have this talk again? Neither of you are going to be able to objectively prove that one way is right.
That doesn't really bother me. We're just yakkin.
Anyway, nothing interesting happening with the winkylinks today.
All of this already exists. Remember - it's human nature to be inventive and overcome solutions when rationing and limited resources are at hand. Trial by fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
It's harder to make a LLC with only one person but it can be done (no reason it can't). If you mind your P's and Q's with accounting and legal documents you can do it. Otherwise the courts / government (IRS specifically, or Revenue Canada up here) tag you a sole proprietorship.
Not really, many of the most corrupt governments in the world are super small by Western standards. Think sub-Sahara Africa. They don't have large bureaucracies and they don't provide many services to their citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
What opens up a government to corruption is access points by the public, and a general culture of lawfulness and constitutionality. Thing is, we rightfully believe that the government should have many access points. The second point is more important. People must believe in the rule of law. For a long time we did pretty good on that... but I would argue that we have gotten away from that in the past 30 years. The elites in Washington and Wall Street believe they are above the law, and can not be punished for their actions. This is a problem, a big problem.
So what you're saying is black people can't govern.
Oh great, now my hidden fortune will be revealed.
Scylla?
Is this ever gonna get interesting again?
Weren't they supposed to release a bunch of dirt on Bank of America?
Isn't the whole point of WL that whistleblowers can remain anonymous? This guy rocks up to a press conference with THE MOST WATCHED MOTHERFUCKER IN THE WORLD, hands over company secrets, then flies home, into custody to face charges - wtf?Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
What is up with this? I am very curious.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
He said early 2011. Probably within the next couple months
While it's true that the small government of developing African countries can be just as corrupt I think the reality and cause has more to do with the lack of infrastructure in almost all countries overrun by warlords. I think that has more to do with the impoverished being unable to help themselves than anything. Creates a mob atmosphere ripe for propaganda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
They really haven't, though. All the way back to Hearst and the other oil tycoons lifting regulatory laws in business (to begin a business in America pre-industrialization you had to propose why it was good for America). t is SO EASY to hide behind a corporation. I sincerely believe every citizen in the USA (and Canada) should incorporate a business and deal/expense their needs through it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DiffusionX
The United States government might be more corrupt than some South American kleptocracy or African dictatorship just because of the sheer scale of the fraud they commit and the length of time they've kept it going.
The governments I am thinking of are "small governments" set up with an explicit purpose, to rob the people blind and take their resources and distribute them to the ruling elite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
One cannot just wave the words "small government" and think everything will be okay and un-corrupt and awesome. It could actually be worse, really quick, since there is less of a system to capture.
The most important thing is a shared belief in and respect of the rule of law and constant vigilance to defend it.
BTW, Most people also have no damn clue what the government actually spends. Polls come out once in a while which say that Americans think the US government sends 10-20 times more foreign aid abroad than it actually does. Not only that, but most of our foreign aid goes to Israel, which polls show people support. And a lot of other foreign aid comes with strings attached, like the money is used to buy weapons from American manufacturers, which employ Americans who don't want to lose their jobs.
It all comes down a simple fact, most people do not live in reality and surround themselves in a bubble of misconceptions and fantasies. And whenever they are encountered with the truth they just double down on their fairy tales.
I would blame most of the international bullshit from America on the SEE EYE AYE than anything. Though committing genocide on the scale some African leaders have is... well... that's harder to argue is less harmful than stealing millions in our FIAT monopoly money.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave is ok
This reminds me just how simplistic a lot of money-men are about charity. They want to write a cheque and that's it. There's a show on in Canada called Dragon's Den. It was on in the States under the name Shark Tank (but sucked - probably canceled). People go in looking for investment capital and if they can sway the "Dragons" (rich entrepreneurs) they can get money for a stake in their business. An otherwise pretty smart businessman named Kevin O'Leary (one of the dragons) gave such shitty advice about charity. One entrepreneur came in looking for investment capital. His whole product line of shoes, Oliberté, is being manufactured in Africa. It's actually a network of facilities in 3 or 4 African countries. Because of this his shoes cost 120 - 150 dollars, but they're really nice. The materials are locally produce and harvested in sustainable ways and the local labour puts them together in small factories. This investor (called a "dragon" on the show) questioned why he would manufacture the shoes in Africa when he could take the designs to China, charge the same and make a killing. The shoe maker could then just take that money and write cheques to these African nations in charitable donations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
The obvious problem with African charity (a lot, anyway) is that there is no middle class infrastructure in Africa. When you give money to poor people in America they spend it at the grocery store, on booze, on games, whatever. Almost all African nation donations go the governments and stay in government hands. The governments will spend it on supplies or whatever (and a lot of the condition-based options you mentions) - but the majority of people in Africa have no bank account (the upper class does). So writing a blank cheque is nothing more than satisfying your own morality. It doesn't help the impoverished because there is no system of displacement for these resources to be allocated.
This guy is creating actual physical infrastructure for people. He's not paying them slave wages. He's paying them above the poverty line wage. People are lining up to try and get jobs with him, and there's pride with these people who are producing these shoes. He's making people work for their money - the exact way charity should be (other than education and health, obviously). If enough people invested in the area poverty would be diminished considerably. So even from an investment standpoint people who are in early on developing work states are going to benefit.
Anyway I know I'm off on a tangent here. But it just goes with your point of people living in fantasy and perpetuating misconceptions.
I remember right after the Haiti quake someone on Facebook was freaking out over the U.S. sending them two million dollars or something. Most people can't comprehend how little of an amount that is to the U.S. government. They think of it in personal terms or something and get all pissed off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh
As I understood it it was supposed to be after they got all the cables out.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave is ok
Guess somebody wanted to be a martyr?Quote:
Originally Posted by Detour
BTW what is this? I've been playine Minecraft pretty nonstop haven't been reading news.
You are kind of right, but I think you are playing too much blame game. Like these people are just stupid and their stupidity is their own fault, for well, being stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Honestly, I think the world changed too much and too fast for everyone over 40 in the US. People were accustomed to the news telling them what they need to know. TV and the Paper gave you real information. And it was information people didn't want to hear, but they still took it.
Take Vietnam for example. Americans got a lot of information about that war that they did not want to see. It had an impact and the war lost favor with the people. To this day a lot of hard core republicans blame the media for "losing" that war. That the media report too much truth and the masses lost their stomach for it.
Now, that doesn't happen. We don't see much about what our government and industry is doing in other nations. Most news channels are full of shows meant to entertain. Like yesterday everyone was upset about Palin being a dumbass and using a phrase incorrectly. Something about something being antisemitism. You'd think it was real world internet and me and you were arguing about some stupid shit I mispelled.
And people over 40 don't know how to use the internet to find good information. They just type in CNN.com or Foxnews.com. They don't do any of that extra leg work. It isn't even in their frame of vision. They don't know the world changed. They are still living in a world where the local paper, a couple tv channels and a national paper are good enough. And who is to say they are wrong. Shouldn't 2 or 3 American news sources be enough to be informed?
lol. Why would they even get mad at that? And by your standards I'm probably a pretty conservative person. I'm not a fan of blind charity, but... you know... all of their buildings just fell down and there's easily-quelled disease rampant everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by dave is ok
He's actually probably the smartest kind of whistle blower. The banks would probably try and get him if he had secrets left to share. But as it stands his assassination would only prove to stir up more controversy over the action of the banks and legitimize his claims in the eyes of the public (whether they have merit or not). Remember the D.C. Madam all those old pervs in Washington were going to? The article claims she said she would commit suicide. But I've heard 3 interviews with her where she denied those claims and said she would NEVER commit suicide. So apparently she died from "suicide". She also had tons of dirt on a bunch of high-ranked politicians from Washington she kept to herself. It makes people an easy target to withhold information, because the easiest way to ensure compliance of not releasing it is to axe them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anal Kaboom
Saw this. Figured I would post it since there hasn't been anything new in a while. This kid at Georgia Tech got his shit raided by the FBI looking WL sympathizers. Pretty disgusting. Kid hasn't been charged with anything and got everything he needs for school confiscated.
Yeah man that shit is crazy. I hadn't even heard that chick died. We're living in interesting times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
So, when do we learn about Bank of Amurica?
Something about it being a great time to refinance your automobile.
Refinance on these nuts. Ballers buy their cars with ca$h money.
this is retarded:Quote:
Originally Posted by Anal Kaboom
the FBI doesn't know what Anonymous is? They think it is an actual group?Quote:
They were also looking for any records related to a group called Anonymous. The group is a loosely formed web of hackers around the globe sympathetic to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and has been going after anyone who has gone after him or his funding, including Sarah Palin.
Anonymous were after Palin long before wikileaks became a hot story. What shitty reporting.
What's even funnier is that anon went after the 'security' firm that the FBI was dealing with and pretty much ruined their shit.
Wikileaks better put out some interesting shit soon.
I'm getting antsy for the 'pocalypse.
Egg on your face if it turns out to be really boring.
Sperm on your face if it doesn't?
Sperm on his face either way.
I am wondering the same thing. They said he had a big release about "notorious banks". Yet... nothing so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh
Wikileaks trolled the hell out of you guys
Or maybe it has something to do with Assange's legal trouble...
or maybe ....
There's articles about it. He's dangling the BoA shit over the Daily Telegraph in order to try and persuade them to do business with him which is quite a bitch move
Also, BoA probably hired some data intelligence firms to start a FUD campaign against Wikileaks and people important to it's operation
is that real, because it is amazing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Anal Kaboom
Yeah it's real. A federal "security" firm got hacked to pieces by a 16 year old girl.