Darling Of The Left,Michael Moore Gives $20K For Assange Bail...

[Synthaholic]

That only applies if Assange is a journalist.

He's not.

You don't get to decide who's a journalist and who's not. For all intents and purposes, he is.

You and Synthaholic need to get your stories straight.

You and California Girl need to get your stories straight:

Assange might call himself a journalist. I could call myself the Queen of England - wouldn't make it true. Assange is not a journalist. He has no degree in journalism, he has not worked as a journalist.... in fact, between him and me, I'd be more accurately described as a journalist than him. But don't let facts get in your way.

She is correct. You? Not so much.

 

[daveman]

You don't get to decide who's a journalist and who's not. For all intents and purposes, he is.

You and Synthaholic need to get your stories straight.

You and California Girl need to get your stories straight:

Assange might call himself a journalist. I could call myself the Queen of England - wouldn't make it true. Assange is not a journalist. He has no degree in journalism, he has not worked as a journalist.... in fact, between him and me, I'd be more accurately described as a journalist than him. But don't let facts get in your way.

She is correct. You? Not so much.

Let's see...I said he's not a journalist. She said he's not a journalist.

But she's right, and I'm wrong?

Just more knee-jerk, unthinking "Dave said it so it MUST be wrong!" non-logic on your part, isn't it?

Moron.

 

[R.C. Christian]

So how many soldiers voluntarily fighting a ridiculous, phony war against a completely fabricated enemy have died since another american soldier stole the diplomatic cables and gave them to Assange?

By the lack itelligence and maturity demonstrated in this thread I suppose we should be calling for Moore's execution too! Never can have enough blood when so many soldiers are dying because of these leaked cables, I mean, the bodies are just piling up. Afterall, nothing quenches the thirst for blood among undereducated american sheep like the refreshing taste of more blood.

^ One of the dumber posts in this thread.

Of course, when you start with retarded premises, it's difficult for the fucking post to improve in the ensuing mess of words.

The "enemy" our servicemen are fighting are not now and never have been fabricated at all. What a douche bag thing to mutter.

It's called casue and effect. That is the source of the fabrication. U.S. foreign policy wrong or right creates enemies. Even a low iq, boot licking D.C. lover like yourself should be able to grasp such a simple concept. And besides, no matter what your feelings are about Assange, he is not bound by U.S. law so I would suggest you make like Mike Huckabee and turn you blood lust back to the person who actually stole the information, LOL.

 

[Douger]

So to the left Asangeeeeeee is a hero? The hate America First club is officially in session. Go Team.

Anyone who doesn't hate the US Govt, and it's foreign relation policies, is a fucking idiot.

 

[Synthaholic]

You and Synthaholic need to get your stories straight.

You and California Girl need to get your stories straight:

Assange might call himself a journalist. I could call myself the Queen of England - wouldn't make it true. Assange is not a journalist. He has no degree in journalism, he has not worked as a journalist.... in fact, between him and me, I'd be more accurately described as a journalist than him. But don't let facts get in your way.

She is correct. You? Not so much.

Let's see...I said he's not a journalist. She said he's not a journalist.

But she's right, and I'm wrong?

Just more knee-jerk, unthinking "Dave said it so it MUST be wrong!" non-logic on your part, isn't it?

Moron.

Where did you say that?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That only applies if Assange is a journalist.

He's not.

You don't get to decide who's a journalist and who's not. For all intents and purposes, he is.

You and Synthaholic need to get your stories straight.

Why?

But more importantly, where does the arbitrary requirement of being a "journalist" fall into the legal definition of Freedom of the Press, and Supreme Court precedence?

 

[California Girl]

Troll fail.

Assange might call himself a journalist. I could call myself the Queen of England - wouldn't make it true. Assange is not a journalist. He has no degree in journalism, he has not worked as a journalist.... in fact, between him and me, I'd be more accurately described as a journalist than him. But don't let facts get in your way.

A better description of Assange would be 'publisher'.

No, it wouldn't. He runs a website. As do millions of others.

He is not a journalist. He is not a publisher.

 

[editec]

The court gave Assanges the opportunity to post bail.

Complaining about the people who are helping him get that money is sort of missing the point.

If you're truly upset about that, you ought to be pissed at the judge who granted him that right.

 

[daveman]

You and California Girl need to get your stories straight:

​

She is correct. You? Not so much.

Let's see...I said he's not a journalist. She said he's not a journalist.

But she's right, and I'm wrong?

Just more knee-jerk, unthinking "Dave said it so it MUST be wrong!" non-logic on your part, isn't it?

Moron.

Where did you say that?

Here, dumbass:

That only applies if Assange is a journalist.

He's not.

 

[daveman]

You don't get to decide who's a journalist and who's not. For all intents and purposes, he is.

You and Synthaholic need to get your stories straight.

Why?

But more importantly, where does the arbitrary requirement of being a "journalist" fall into the legal definition of Freedom of the Press, and Supreme Court precedence?

If you want to use that "logic", I'm a journalist, since I disseminate information. So are you. So is everybody on the entire internet.

 

[8537]

You and Synthaholic need to get your stories straight.

Why?

But more importantly, where does the arbitrary requirement of being a "journalist" fall into the legal definition of Freedom of the Press, and Supreme Court precedence?

If you want to use that "logic", I'm a journalist, since I disseminate information. So are you. So is everybody on the entire internet.

When the founders wrote the first amendment, I don't think they planned to have some special class of citizens called "press" that would be ordained with additional rights. Freedom of "the press" is a freedom for all people to report information - not a right for only certain people. The staff of the New York Times are not afforded extra protection, nor can the government pass a law that would generically restrict the public's right to disseminate information but not the right of the NYT's to do so since they are "press" protected by the first amendment.

 

[California Girl]

The court gave Assanges the opportunity to post bail.

Complaining about the people who are helping him get that money is sort of missing the point.

If you're truly upset about that, you ought to be pissed at the judge who granted him that right.

Funny shit with that bail hearing... the guy who believe in open information didn't want his bail address published. So, basically, he wants to publish information about others but is not so keen on it working the other way around. Assange is a hypocrite.

 

[Dr Grump]

Funny shit with that bail hearing... the guy who believe in open information didn't want his bail address published. So, basically, he wants to publish information about others but is not so keen on it working the other way around. Assange is a hypocrite.

BS..no, he wants to publish information about the people who work for us. Does he work for us? er, no...massive fail..try again...

 

[California Girl]

Funny shit with that bail hearing... the guy who believe in open information didn't want his bail address published. So, basically, he wants to publish information about others but is not so keen on it working the other way around. Assange is a hypocrite.

BS..no, he wants to publish information about the people who work for us. Does he work for us? er, no...massive fail..try again...

It is not BS. He happily publishes information that damages others.... not so happy when it comes to information about him being in the public domain. FYI: Bail addresses are always published in the UK. Fact. He wanted special treatment.... well, he didn't get it. He's a fucking hypocrite.

 

[Dr Grump]

[

It is not BS. He happily publishes information that damages others.... not so happy when it comes to information about him being in the public domain. FYI: Bail addresses are always published in the UK. Fact. He wanted special treatment.... well, he didn't get it. He's a fucking hypocrite.

1) No, he publishes information about people who work for YOU and ME. Govt officials whose salaries we pay.
2) Is he employed by us and paid by us? no. He is not.
3) Not all bail addresses are published. If you work in the media as you claim, you know that.
4) Of course he wanted special treatment. he is not you average Joe. he is trying to show that certain govts (ie the US) want special treatment (ie, do as we say, not as we do)
5) No, he is not a hypocrite, unless he is saying "Australia, you are our friend (unless that Wacko Kevin Rudd is your PM) like the leaks showed
6) CG, stop trying to make out that this is some sort of normal circumstance. You know it isn't...

 

[California Girl]

[

It is not BS. He happily publishes information that damages others.... not so happy when it comes to information about him being in the public domain. FYI: Bail addresses are always published in the UK. Fact. He wanted special treatment.... well, he didn't get it. He's a fucking hypocrite.

1) No, he publishes information about people who work for YOU and ME. Govt officials whose salaries we pay.
2) Is he employed by us and paid by us? no. He is not.
3) Not all bail addresses are published. If you work in the media as you claim, you know that.
4) Of course he wanted special treatment. he is not you average Joe. he is trying to show that certain govts (ie the US) want special treatment (ie, do as we say, not as we do)
5) No, he is not a hypocrite, unless he is saying "Australia, you are our friend (unless that Wacko Kevin Rudd is your PM) like the leaks showed
6) CG, stop trying to make out that this is some sort of normal circumstance. You know it isn't...

1. He published information STOLEN from my government. He should rot in jail.
2. I don't give a shit who 'employs' him. He's a criminal.
3. Standard procedure in British courts is that bail addresses are not confidential. I don't claim to work 'in the media'. Idiot. I work WITH the media.... two entirely different things.
4. He is not special. He's a suspect in a crime. Most suspected criminals who get bail have their addressed on record.
5. Yes, he is.
6. He's a suspect in a criminal case in Sweden, and is likely to be facing charges in the US. The US DoJ had better fucking charge the bastard. And, once found guilty, I hope he spends decades in the general population of a US prison.

 

[Dr Grump]

[

It is not BS. He happily publishes information that damages others.... not so happy when it comes to information about him being in the public domain. FYI: Bail addresses are always published in the UK. Fact. He wanted special treatment.... well, he didn't get it. He's a fucking hypocrite.

1) No, he publishes information about people who work for YOU and ME. Govt officials whose salaries we pay.
2) Is he employed by us and paid by us? no. He is not.
3) Not all bail addresses are published. If you work in the media as you claim, you know that.
4) Of course he wanted special treatment. he is not you average Joe. he is trying to show that certain govts (ie the US) want special treatment (ie, do as we say, not as we do)
5) No, he is not a hypocrite, unless he is saying "Australia, you are our friend (unless that Wacko Kevin Rudd is your PM) like the leaks showed
6) CG, stop trying to make out that this is some sort of normal circumstance. You know it isn't...

1. He published information STOLEN from my government. He should rot in jail.
2. I don't give a shit who 'employs' him. He's a criminal.
3. Standard procedure in British courts is that bail addresses are not confidential. I don't claim to work 'in the media'. Idiot. I work WITH the media.... two entirely different things.
4. He is not special. He's a suspect in a crime. Most suspected criminals who get bail have their addressed on record.
5. Yes, he is.
6. He's a suspect in a criminal case in Sweden, and is likely to be facing charges in the US. The US DoJ had better fucking charge the bastard. And, once found guilty, I hope he spends decades in the general population of a US prison.

1) He published Jack...He provides the site, others upload.
2) He is not even close to being a criminal. Being an ex cop AND a journalist, I think I know the difference. You?
3) So you are NOT a journalist? That explains a lot. Paris Hilton works WITH the media, too...hmmmm
4) He is special. Whether you like it or not. I am sure he wishes he wasn't, but others have made him so. Not his fault.
5) He is not even close to being a hypocrite.
6) He is only a suspect because he didn't wear a condom. Even the women in Sweden say so. Only the US neocon whackjobs think he has done something wrong. Who gives a shit what the US DOJ does, they sound like a bunch of corrupt arseholes anyway. Big news for you CG - most folk in the normal world think the US judicial system is one big joke - this is proving it - big time. I doubt he will even get to the US - I hope he gives the BIG FAT BIRD to every one of you.
7) Your posts just prove that you are a lot closer to Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao that most of thought - and believe me, when EVER I think of conservative america the words "just like Mao, Pol and Stalin" are not far behind. The irony and hypocrisy of right wing America is not lost on me. They are the biggest shouters and demanders of individual freedoms and wanting smaller govt, and yet time and time again (on this board alone, let alone the real world), they prove they are nothing but hypocrites and try and gag true freedom and liberty. Know this, Assange is YOUR friend - not your enemy. If you can show any lives that have been put at risk, show me. Otherwise STFU and save your DQ act for mid afternoon daytime soaps...seriously...

 

[California Girl]

1) No, he publishes information about people who work for YOU and ME. Govt officials whose salaries we pay.
2) Is he employed by us and paid by us? no. He is not.
3) Not all bail addresses are published. If you work in the media as you claim, you know that.
4) Of course he wanted special treatment. he is not you average Joe. he is trying to show that certain govts (ie the US) want special treatment (ie, do as we say, not as we do)
5) No, he is not a hypocrite, unless he is saying "Australia, you are our friend (unless that Wacko Kevin Rudd is your PM) like the leaks showed
6) CG, stop trying to make out that this is some sort of normal circumstance. You know it isn't...

1. He published information STOLEN from my government. He should rot in jail.
2. I don't give a shit who 'employs' him. He's a criminal.
3. Standard procedure in British courts is that bail addresses are not confidential. I don't claim to work 'in the media'. Idiot. I work WITH the media.... two entirely different things.
4. He is not special. He's a suspect in a crime. Most suspected criminals who get bail have their addressed on record.
5. Yes, he is.
6. He's a suspect in a criminal case in Sweden, and is likely to be facing charges in the US. The US DoJ had better fucking charge the bastard. And, once found guilty, I hope he spends decades in the general population of a US prison.

1) He published Jack...He provides the site, others upload.
2) He is not even close to being a criminal. Being an ex cop AND a journalist, I think I know the difference. You?
3) So you are NOT a journalist? That explains a lot. Paris Hilton works WITH the media, too...hmmmm
4) He is special. Whether you like it or not. I am sure he wishes he wasn't, but others have made him so. Not his fault.
5) He is not even close to being a hypocrite.
6) He is only a suspect because he didn't wear a condom. Even the women in Sweden say so. Only the US neocon whackjobs think he has done something wrong. Who gives a shit what the US DOJ does, they sound like a bunch of corrupt arseholes anyway. Big news for you CG - most folk in the normal world think the US judicial system is one big joke - this is proving it - big time. I doubt he will even get to the US - I hope he gives the BIG FAT BIRD to every one of you.
7) Your posts just prove that you are a lot closer to Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao that most of thought - and believe me, when EVER I think of conservative america the words "just like Mao, Pol and Stalin" are not far behind. The irony and hypocrisy of right wing America is not lost on me. They are the biggest shouters and demanders of individual freedoms and wanting smaller govt, and yet time and time again (on this board alone, let alone the real world), they prove they are nothing but hypocrites and try and gag true freedom and liberty. Know this, Assange is YOUR friend - not your enemy. If you can show any lives that have been put at risk, show me. Otherwise STFU and save your DQ act for mid afternoon daytime soaps...seriously...

I honestly don't give a shit what you think.... it is no more relevant than what I think. However, your hysterical ranting about Stalin, Pol Pot etc just proves that you're becoming slightly unhinged about it.

I referred only to his fucking bail address being published and you're ranting like a little banshee about every issue under the sun. Honestly, Grump, you're behaving like a loon.

Oh, and... just so you know.... telling someone to STFU on the internet is beyond stupid.

 

[Dr Grump]

I honestly don't give a shit what you think.... it is no more relevant than what I think. However, your hysterical ranting about Stalin, Pol Pot etc just proves that you're becoming slightly unhinged about it.

I referred only to his fucking bail address being published and you're ranting like a little banshee about every issue under the sun. Honestly, Grump, you're behaving like a loon.

Oh, and... just so you know.... telling someone to STFU on the internet is beyond stupid.

1) You are engaging me, so you do.
2) My stalin analogy etc is only trying to show you how out of whack you are
3) You act like he shouldn't be treated any different due to his bail address being published, which is just silly. Care to name even 10 UK crims whose situations are being published ALL OVER THE WORLD?
4) I agree with STFU - bad form..apologies
5) Hey for a right winger, I still like you...most times..

 

[8537]

To get some idea how big of a complete fucking setup this whole arrest is, imagine this: On Interpol's list of the ten most wanted criminals in the world, they place a man accused of consensual sex without a condom.

Consensual sex without a condom!

It's not even a half-decent excuse to detain the guy. But it's good enough for the bootlickers to throw justice aside and call for his head - all because he exposed their governments for the frauds they are.