I have decided that I dont like Julian Assange and his Wikileaks. He has developed an ideology:
Less that exposing misdeeds, his goal is to impede the ability of state and military actors to communicate reliably amongst themselves: …while an organization structured by direct and open lines of communication will be much more vulnerable to outside penetration, the more opaque it becomes to itself (as a defense against the outside gaze), the less able it will be to “think” as a system, to communicate with itself.It is a clear anti-state, anarchist political program. I dont like it because I think that my State, the State of Israel, embodies my self and my people, and it works to defend my life and towards my prosperity. I see other states as organizations created to defend the security and the interests of other peoples, and not as obscure, nebolous conspiracies to oppress. In the case of the United States, I see (from the leaked cables more than ever) that its government is much focused on its people's security and their jobs tete-a-tete amoral economic competitors such as the Chinese.
As a person, Assange has had unprotected sex with two fertile women, against their expressed wishes to do it with a condom on. It is obvious to me that he was trying to get them with his child. He is following the human evolutionary strategy of becoming salient and famous, and thus improve his chances of accessing females and impregnating them. He is definitely acting against established social order, where you have to marry and invest many years to reproduce. He has violated European ways and morals. He also paints his hair ash blond. Pfuiiia.
8 comments:
Give the dog a bad name....It is strangely stress relieving now try this, next time you burn some toast or get a flat shout " Julies/Osama this is all your fault, you XXXX" you will feel so much better.
the human evolutionary strategy of becoming salient and famous,
Maybe he was just horny?
Stay sharp man, no socks and Interpol will put the word out for you along with terrorists, drug kingpins, mass murderers and WMD proliferatas.
I am...doubtful of those women's accounts.
As far as the USG just looking out for the security and jobs of the US populace, if this were so, it would not be encouraging travel and immigration to the US from such places as Pakistan, Somalia, Egypt, etc. (I see more hijabs in a day on my university campus than I would in a week in Uzbekistan or Bosnia,) or signing NAFTA-type agreements. I am glad that Assange (whom I too find unpleasant as a person, and whose ideology strikes me as a bunch of ill-formed bullshit) is giving disgruntled and incompetent USG employees the opportunity to leak their info to the world as opposed to the Russian, Chinese, Israeli etc. intelligence services. Any loss of lives or damage to our interests is nothing compared to the losses caused by the anonymous decisions of the bureaucrats who write and implement our policies on a daily basis.
The accounts ring true - they don't exactly paint the women in a favorable light. But whether what he did constitutes "rape" or a crime under any plausible definition other than Swedish-feminist law is another question. In most US states, no prosecutor would dare present such a case to a jury - the only place where I have heard such ridiculous definitions being applied were before politically correct college disciplinary boards which operate without due process, where there is this ridiculous notion that you have to stop a sexual encounter every few minutes to seek fresh consent of the other party, preferably in writing.
Assange is not a US citizen and holds no duty to keep its secrets. There were Americans that did have such a duty (including, despite "don't ask, don't tell, a hysterical gay drama queen who was permitted access to secrets) and those who had a duty to set up a proper security system in the 1st place. The stupidity that permeates our government at all levels is stunning - have these people all taken stupid pills? Their heads should roll, though if they can pin some charges on the slimeball Assange I wouldn't mind either.
K
K
I beg to differ. The cables show US Ambassadors WORKING very hard to protect and advance American interests. In a former position I have been invited to many diplomatic parties filled with operetta uniformed military attaches and their wives, and except the American and the Israeli diplomats, they all were sinecure enjoying politicians or vacationing friends of somebody. The dream of every high class goy in Buenos Aires was to be Argentine Ambassador in Paris. That was not a job or a mission, but paradise.
The people they have working are all very sincere but they all suffer from one problem or the other - either they are not that smart which is why they are working for the government instead of the private sector, or they are smart but they are infected by liberal ideology. To find someone like say a Bolton who is both smart and clear headed is rare (and Bolton was unable to gain confirmation by the Senate). We need thousands of Boltons at all levels of the diplomatic service , but such men are rare and the Senate refused to confirm even one.
As for the American "success" against terrorism, it is partly a matter of luck and partly a contest of the stupid (TSA) against the really stupid (Muslim terrorists), so the merely stupid usually win.
K
"A contest of the really stupid against the merely stupid"... Well, isnt that like everything?
Post a Comment