Your video, 5200 Pentagon Employees PURCHASED Child Pornography!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Mandtis:

"Approximately 23,000 military and civilian employees[3] and about 3,000 non-defense support personnel work in the Pentagon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon
5200 out of about 26000...?? Not a chance I can believe that.


The title is wrong. There were 5200 people on the list provided by the sting operation. Only a few hundred of those could be tied to the pentagon/DoD. 1% I can buy.

"Approximately 23,000 military and civilian employees[3] and about 3,000 non-defense support personnel work in the Pentagon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon

5200 out of about 26000...?? Not a chance I can believe that.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Zonbie:
Brings a whole new meaning to the term "Military Porn"

That's a term I've never heard.


"Military porn" is footage of really cool military gear like tanks and A10 Warthogs and the p173 Self-correcting .50 calibre sniper bullet etc etc. I just read it for the articles.

>> ^Zonbie:

Brings a whole new meaning to the term "Military Porn"


That's a term I've never heard.

This entire situation also proves that in the US we basically have no free press anymore. Besides the Times and a few other news organizations, the US news media is entirely bought and sold by corporations and the government itself.

The government really has succeeded at the impossible by all but completely subverting the Free Press in this country and the outrage over Wikileaks by many of the major news outlets just goes to show how everything they say is controlled by the corporations that own them. Most of the 'news' we have today is just sensationalism and subversion. The title of this very video is an example of that. Just like with the Pentagon Papers, which exposed that the pentagon had provoked an attack on US vessels by the North Vietnamese and then lied about saying the attack was unwarranted in an attempt to swing public favor to those who wanted a war. Sound familiar?

Democracy is rule by consensus of the populace. Fascism is rule by a single party state.

Just because the U.S. is some weird two party fascist hybrid dipped in a liberal, "Democratic Republic", white chocolaty shell.. doesn't mean the two are the same.

And just because our "democracy" is corrupt and broken doesn't mean automatically that "democracy = facade for crime."

~~~
Also, who exactly are the victims and who are the aggressors?

You're saying that stupid bigoted [hah] tribalistic commoners are the evil oppressor running the show?

Because.. that's sorta like arguing that U.S. Troops decided to invade Iraq for their own political and economic reasons.

The Pentagon, Defense Depart, Cheney and the CIA were just lowly goons waitin' for a kickback.

~~~
Lastly, I'll say:

Governments exist to organize a group. [tribe if you will]
Individuals within the group express how they wish to be organized thru voting.

If everyone agrees. You have consensus and the tribe's power is consolidated.
If some disagree. You have factions and the tribe's power is split.

Anything that forces one half to remain linked to the other [in order to exploit that power] after such a split is "fascist", in the sense i think you meant.

Both you and Aristotle are keen to note how fuck up it is that the Majority would give up their Power [time & energy] to a State in order to control the power of the Minority.

Tho, scapegoating the commoner when a relative few Power Elite are to blame for your problems is missing the forest for the trees.

>> ^gorillaman:

Democracy is fascism. Every democratic state is a fascist state.
'Normal, rational people' is a contradiction in terms. Pre-WW2 Germany was filled with fascists, as every country today is filled with fascists. They didn't just rationalise. They wholeheartedly embraced and perpetuated the evils of their state, as every population would today. As every population does today.
Democracy exists for one reason only, which is to legitimise crime. Want your neighbour's wealth? You can't just steal it, that would be wrong. Get your government to do it for you, after they've taken their cut. Suddenly it's fair. Want to tell him how to live his life? Want to throw him in prison?
When the victims complain, their aggressors can say, "Hey, it's the will of the people. You had your chance to vote."
Tribalism, wilful ignorance, escalating bigotry, absolute selfishness, perfect stupidity; these are the characteristics of the typical voter, that's democracy. These are the people you want in charge?

I say Assange is not guilty. All he did is made public the documents. He did not steal them.

HULU has a documentary on the Pentagon Papers. Titled The most Dangerous man in America.

1971 Daniel Ellsberg, a high-level Pentagon official and Vietnam War strategist, concluded that the war is based on decades of lies and subsequently leaks 7,000 pages of top secret documents to The New York Times.

The Most Dangerous Man in America.

Definitely contains good interviews with Moore and Stone. I hope they dedicate a full doc on the specifics of the relationship between Hollywood and the Pentagon. It seems to me that, possibly, Hollywood might be manipulating the military by accurate use of history. So, for instance the ghost writer or whoever puts a spin on the next Incredible Hulk script. Spins it so it takes place in Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge just so the Pentagon offers up use of their gear in order to re-write the script.

I simply asked a straightforward question. It is a fact that the US invaded and continued the Vietnam War under false pretenses. And facts are darned things.

I'm amazed you're so eager to call someone who leaks confidential documents but apparently are willing to fully brush off a government lying to it's people.

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

You know what annoys me the most about what you say is you just don't have any consistent beliefs. Your only consistency seems to be that you always just happen to agree with Republican rhetoric.

If you were really concerned about Vietnamese deaths, you would have realised that a communist regime would have been a far better outcome, spared countless lives and would have resulted in a conversion to capitalism gradually just like Vietnam is doing now.

And hey, I bet you opposed intervention in Kosovo when Clinton was in office, right? Quite ironic if so, right?

And what about intervening in Rwanda and right now in Darfur? Against that too I'm guessing?

>> ^quantumushroom:

Your loaded question was actually the most civil response.
Wouldn't release 'em. Why be a traitor when the Pentagon Papers had zero effect on the Democrat-run Vietnam War?
False pretenses? You mean, communists didn't murder 2 million Vietnamese?
At least Ellsberg was ready to accept his fate.

@ quantumushroom

If you had gained access to the Pentagon Papers, would you have made them available or kept hidden that the US invaded Vietnam under false pretenses?

Are they seriously this stupid? Or do they believe that the US owns the world like it says it does?

EDIT: Also they tried this charging the NY Times bullshit when the Pentagon Papers came out. They know they can't do anything about it, it's just ridiculous. I think the only thing they're trying to do is remind everyone to get back into lock step and treat Wikileaks as criminals instead of journalists.

WikiLeaks' Bottom-Line Revelation

by

Austin Bay

Julian Assange, the man behind the WikiLeaks dump of secret US State Department cables, has been frank about his reasons for releasing thousands of classified -and stolen -- documents.

Assange says he wants to seriously damage the United States. If this damage forwards America's ultimate destruction, so be it. The son of leftist America-haters, Assange was born and weaned during the Cold War. Then the wrong side won. What the superpower Soviet Union failed to do with its armies, he, a super-empowered individual, will accomplish via the information anarchy of the Internet.

If Assange's history-shaping goal seems grandiose and detached from reality, indeed it is. However, once you understand the man's religion, his megalomania and solipsism become a bit more comprehensible if even more reprehensible.

Like other anti-American cranks on the planet, Assange holds firm in his warped faith that the U.S. is the leading source of global evil. The roots of this religion run deep, beginning with 18th century European aristocrats who despised the American Revolution. The anti-Americanism of Nazis, communists, tribalists, anarchists and now militant Islamists all rehash the same tropes, with their semi-schizoid baseline being the U.S. is simultaneously a vast authoritarian conspiracy and a heterogeneous menagerie of infidel-cowboy-capitalist idiots who dogmatically resist enlightened social policies.

Assange argues his revelations will force this conglomerate American monster to become more secretive and authoritarian. Limiting access to information, in order to stop future leaks, will reduce the monster's secretive and authoritarian effectiveness. The monster's "security state" will dumb down, and --here's the moment of religious rapture in Assange's prophecy -- this will increase global justice.

Assange also links this shackling of America to creating peace. Don't snicker too long. There are a lot of tenured gray-haired profs with ponytails who teach this dreck at notable universities and get paid for it.

Assange understands media grandstanding, but he doesn't understand people and certainly doesn't understand how American diplomats contribute to maintaining peace.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates understands people and diplomacy, and his assessment of Assange's info dump is as clear as it is historically and psychologically informed. At the Pentagon last week, Gates said: "The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it's in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us and not because they believe we can keep secrets. Many governments -- some governments -- deal with us because they fear us, some because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as has been said before, the indispensable nation."

Gates added that the cables were "embarrassing" and "awkward," but the ultimate effects on policy would be "modest."

Pray that Gates is right about modest impact, but right now and for at least the next six months, the world confronts the possibility of a nuclear war in East Asia ignited by North Korean aggression. This is a time period when the world absolutely needs close -- and trustworthy -- cooperation between the U.S. and China. A big war in Korea could kill millions but will guarantee a global economic depression. Leaked cables discuss corruption in China's Communist Party and names hypocritical party elites.

Even if the information is accurate, this is a case where revealed candor damages personal relationships among key U.S. diplomatic personnel and Chinese leaders. China is a face culture, and the leaders have lost face. A mature appreciation of the common danger should override personal anger, but another leak revealed that China sees North Korea as a "spoiled child" and that it believes Korea will ultimately be reunited with South Korea absorbing the North. This revelation weakens China's political leverage with North Korea at a moment when any leverage is precious.

Assange, of course, did not consider how he increased the threat to the lives of millions of Korean, Japanese and Chinese when he dumped his filched documents. His faith-based narrative of American evil excludes the possibility that American diplomats are collaborating with China to avoid war and eventually put an end to North Korea's armed brinksmanship without a nuclear explosion.

Here's WikiLeaks' bottom-line revelation: Assange and ideologues like him promote an ignorant and destructive solipsism that has nothing to do with peace and justice but a lot to do with sociopathic narcissism.

Your loaded question was actually the most civil response.

Wouldn't release 'em. Why be a traitor when the Pentagon Papers had zero effect on the Democrat-run Vietnam War?

False pretenses? You mean, communists didn't murder 2 million Vietnamese?

At least Ellsberg was ready to accept his fate.


@ quantumushroom


If you had gained access to the Pentagon Papers, would you have made them available or kept hidden that the US invaded Vietnam under false pretenses?

@quantumushroom

If you had gained access to the Pentagon Papers, would you have made them available or kept hidden that the US invaded Vietnam under false pretenses?

I'm gonna go and agree with morganth atleast partially.

Some things that are stated in the pentagon should be kept secret especially hurtful remakes like calling prime minisiters of super powers names since our society and culture is based on not telling what you really feel, with the exception when you're drunk. Also we've all talked trashed about people behind theyre backs and its just that, trash talk, its human so i think keeping a charade that we all like each other is more important than spilling every bean atleast for now when the world isin't ready for that degree of transparency. It's a matter of the greater good (This applies almost exclusivly for social secrets)

Then again when it comes to crimes against humanity, greed, corruption and deception i say full force in every whole.

So what assange is doing is 99.5% good 0.5% hurtful so the good outweighs the bad quite a bit