ONLY GREENS DEFENDING ASSANGE- GOP & DEMS ATTACK

I'm curious Cato, how is he beholden to not print the information he receives? He’s not a United States citizen, so why shouldn’t he be able to print the information?

Aaron wrote:I'm curious Cato, how is he beholden to not print the information he receives? He’s not a United States citizen, so why shouldn’t he be able to print the information?

He can do what he wants, but his actions carry consequences. When his actions endanger American lives, there is a responsibility to silence him. He can be very thankful I'm notthe president. If I were, he's be dead, and website would be a hole int he ground, and those who gave him this information would be dead if the were not US Citiziens or they would be facing Treason charges and the death penality if they were US Citizens.

What you people don't seem to understand is, like it or not, we are at war. We can discuss all the ins and outs of why we are at war, but we are going to come back the the simple fact we are at war. We are in a war that if we soon don't take the threats seriously we are going to loose. I don't fancy living in a world where muslim fanatic rule.

On what Constitutional backing do you commit all these murders Cato?

Aaron wrote:On what Constitutional backing do you commit all these murders Cato?

My responsibility to defend and protect the rights of the CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES.

I've read the constitution a time or two. I don't recall seeing the murder clause. So what am I missing?

Cato wrote:What you people don't seem to understand is, like it or not, we are at war.

Now Willy, I don't recall hearing or reading that Congress and/or the POTUS officially declared War on any country and thus we are not at War with any country ........ and besides I do not think said "leaks" is endangering the sovernity of this country and thus is not a Constitutional problem.

Ells bells, Willy, failure to guard and protect our Border with Mexico is a Constitutional problem that should beg the call for charges of treason.

And just because everyone calls them a War on Poverty, a War on Drugs and a War on Terrorism does not make them officially a War.

And therefore I would think that any criteria you would apply to, for or against the War on Terrorism ......... should also be applied equally to, for or against the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs.

And lord knows there are good guys being killed every day as a result of classified and/or secret information being distributed by "inside informers" pertaining to the War on Drugs.

I'm like a child who wanders into a conversation...

Congressman Ron Paul made a statement regarding the usefulness of Assange's actions. I like that a light was shined on the government. It all seems pretty innocuous to me although I suppose it would be possible to ferret out moles under deep cover... I'd like to see what our friend, Randall had to say.

One other point: I admit and always have that I was wrong about Terri Schiavo. The state of Florida had the right to allow her lying waste of a husband to remove her feeding tube. Normally I support states' rights over the rights of the federal government. I think I was caught up in the moment. I was wrong.

Don't you remember/I told you/
I'm a soldier/in the war on poverty?

Good post, sam.

Aaron wrote:I've read the constitution a time or two. I don't recall seeing the murder clause. So what am I missing?

Common Sence

Thanks Cato, I needed a good laugh this morning. Now I just have to be more mindfule of taking a drink of coffee and reading your comedy.

Aaron wrote:

Thanks Cato, I needed a good laugh this morning. Now I just have to be more mindfule of taking a drink of coffee and reading your comedy.

Thank you very much!!!! I do try

I sincerely hope that I'm not one day saying I told you so, however.

What are you going to be telling me "I told you so" over? The clause that allows a President to commit murder that was somehow left out of the constitution but was mysteriously found at Mount Vernon.

I think I'm safe on that not happening.

Aaron wrote:What are you going to be telling me "I told you so" over? The clause that allows a President to commit murder that was somehow left out of the constitution but was mysteriously found at Mount Vernon.

I think I'm safe on that not happening.

No, that the leaks caused this nation harm.

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:What are you going to be telling me "I told you so" over? The clause that allows a President to commit murder that was somehow left out of the constitution but was mysteriously found at Mount Vernon.

I think I'm safe on that not happening.

No, that the leaks caused this nation harm.

Where did I say they have not or will not cause this nation harm?

Aaron wrote:

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:What are you going to be telling me "I told you so" over? The clause that allows a President to commit murder that was somehow left out of the constitution but was mysteriously found at Mount Vernon.

I think I'm safe on that not happening.

No, that the leaks caused this nation harm.

Where did I say they have not or will not cause this nation harm?

Then if his actions are causing harm to this nation doesn't the leadership have the responsibility to do what is necessary to protect the nation from harm?

Sorry man but that doesn't include murder. There's no sanction in the constitution for it. At all. No where to be found. Not even in the mythical common sense clause.

As for our leadership, they have many responsibilities including not taking this nation to war to nation build, or to rebuild Iraq oil infrastructure or to protect a future pipe line in Afghanistan as a means of keeping world oil prices stable.

I would submit that if our leaders want to prevent harm to this nation, the best thing they can do is act in an ethical manner.

Aaron wrote:Sorry man but that doesn't include murder. There's no sanction in the constitution for it. At all. No where to be found. Not even in the mythical common sense clause.

You mean to tell me that the there is no authority in the US Constitution to wage war or to do what is necessary to prevent harm to this nation?

Aaron wrote:As for our leadership, they have many responsibilities including not taking this nation to war to nation build, or to rebuild Iraq oil infrastructure or to protect a future pipe line in Afghanistan as a means of keeping world oil prices stable.

I would submit that if our leaders want to prevent harm to this nation, the best thing they can do is act in an ethical manner.

And I agree with you, but the reality is they haven't acted in a ethical manner so here we are. My question is what do we do? Do we just allow those who would harm us to do so? On a personal note, I'm not willing to be offered as some sacrificial lamb, simply because our leadership has acted irresponsibily and others feel guilty about it. I fully expect our leadership to do what is necessary to neutralize threats to this nation. Of course with our present leadership that is asking alot IMHO!!!

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:Sorry man but that doesn't include murder. There's no sanction in the constitution for it. At all. No where to be found. Not even in the mythical common sense clause.

You mean to tell me that the there is no authority in the US Constitution to wage war or to do what is necessary to prevent harm to this nation?

Yes. Are you saying we should declare war against an individual.

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:As for our leadership, they have many responsibilities including not taking this nation to war to nation build, or to rebuild Iraq oil infrastructure or to protect a future pipe line in Afghanistan as a means of keeping world oil prices stable.

I would submit that if our leaders want to prevent harm to this nation, the best thing they can do is act in an ethical manner.

And I agree with you, but the reality is they haven't acted in a ethical manner so here we are. My question is what do we do? Do we just allow those who would harm us to do so? On a personal note, I'm not willing to be offered as some sacrificial lamb, simply because our leadership has acted irresponsibily and others feel guilty about it. I fully expect our leadership to do what is necessary to neutralize threats to this nation. Of course with our present leadership that is asking alot IMHO!!!

First, I don't think you're going to be offered as sacrificial lamb. That's a bit melodramatic. To answer your question regarding Assange, what do we do? Absolutely nothing. He's not a United States Citizen, is not located in the United States so there is not much we can do.

I am curious though, you seem to think he is doing great harm to the US. I don't suppose you can elaborate, can you?

Aaron wrote:

Cato wrote: You mean to tell me that the there is no authority in the US Constitution to wage war or to do what is necessary to prevent harm to this nation?

Yes. Are you saying we should declare war against an individual.

I saying his actions are capable of causing great harm. I am saying that his actions amount to giving aid to those who would harm us.

Aaron wrote: First, I don't think you're going to be offered as sacrificial lamb. That's a bit melodramatic. To answer your question regarding Assange, what do we do? Absolutely nothing. He's not a United States Citizen, is not located in the United States so there is not much we can do.

I am curious though, you seem to think he is doing great harm to the US. I don't suppose you can elaborate, can you?

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the first of your reply. I will tell you this, if I were the man in charge Assange would not be an issue today, nor would his website. You can read into that what you will.

As far as harm goes he is providing information that could jeapordize the lives of people who have cooporated with us. Some of what he has published could jeapordize relationships with other nations or groups that have provided information. Additionally, his actions embolden the people we are fighting, pretty much the same of the goons in congress have done.

Aaron wrote:
I am curious though, you seem to think he is doing great harm to the US. I don't suppose you can elaborate, can you?

Here's more to ponder Aaron

Read More Here

Ponder this Cato. The article you referenced starts out by talking about the amount of information available on the web and how that is a bad thing. This comes about at the SAME time the FCC is discussing restricting the flow of information on the web.

When you couple this with the fact that a Private First Class is allegedly responsible for releasing 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables, the kind of confidential assessments diplomats have written since the era of wax seals. These include Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah urging the U.S. to end Iran's nuclear ambitions—to "cut the head off the snake", this all seems just a tad too convenient for my comfort.

So now the current administration now has a reason for implementing tighter communication rules citing much of the same arguments you've cited and we as Americans are supposed to be outraged and willingly give in to internet restrictions because to do otherwise is placing America in harms way.

I don't buy that any more then I believe a private first class is responsible for the release of hundreds of thousands of America's supposedly most classified communications.

While I am certain that this present administration will not "let this crisis go to waste" and I am certain that the leaks go far further than a private first class, that isn't the point being discussed. The point is the leaks have done a great deal of damage and will, if they haven't already, cause the death of people. It is the responsibility of the leadership of this nation to silence Assange, find who is responsibile for the leaks, try them for treason, and if found guilty execute them.

That being said, I'm willing to bet that the leak of these documents can be found close to our present leadership, either in Congress or in the Whitehouse. All of this is just a bit too convienent. Additionally, I am fairly confident, we have the ability to shut Wikileaks down, if the order was given to do so.

Aaron (Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:55 pm) wrote:Ponder this Cato. This comes about at the SAME time the FCC is discussing restricting the flow of information on the web. ...... this all seems just a tad too convenient for my comfort.

I think you got er, Aaron, ....... I think you got er figured out. I'se proud of yu.

The Progressive Politicians and heads of our government agencies know that they just can't pass new Laws curtailing our Rights without good reason ........ and the bestest reasons in the world is to either ....... piss off the majority of the populace ......... or scare the bejesus out of them ....... and then they will be begging n' pleading for the government to protect them ....... by curtailing the Rights of everyone in hopes that they themselves won't get hurt or killed.

The first time I remember them pulling this crapolla was when ......
D B Cooper hijacked the very first airplane on November 24, 1971, a Portland, Oregon to Seattle, Washington flight. (n dat was a hyper link back dere)

Shortly after that incident occurred, all airline passengers were forced to pass thru metal detectors or submit to a body scan with a hand-held metal detector.

I member one time, t'was about 10:30 pm, being in line "to be scanned" with a hand-held metal detector prior to boarding a Mohawk flight from NYC to Utica, ... which was already 1 1/2 hours late getting off the ground, ..... and one of the passengers was heard to say: "Who in hell would be dumb enough to hijack a Slowhawk airplane".

Cato (Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:44 am) wrote:The point is the leaks have done a great deal of damage and will, if they haven't already, cause the death of people.

Aaawwww, for key ricest sake, Willy, ....... what the hell is all this "great deal of damage" you are talking about?

I didn't hear you or anyone else hollering to grab um, shoot um, catch um, hang um, electrocute um "whistleblower(s)"....... for treason ... when they caused that "great deal of damage" and surely a few deaths ....... by releasing those Abu Grabass Prison photos .

No sireeee, I didn't. Ya all just demanded that the Official(s) and/or Officer(s) in charge be severely punished, ..... but not severely DEAD punished. Yup, ya'll were calling for ole Rumsfeldy to be tarred n' feathered.

Its no wonder this country is sliding down the slippery slope into the cess pool, everyone changes their priorities ........ every hour on the hour depending on "Whose ox they want to gore" at the time.

I think I would have to agree with Sam. I've read portions of the leaks including those in the article Cato pasted and I honestly haven't seen anything that is doing a great deal of damage to this country.