On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Jeffrey Walton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Ivan . <[email protected]> wrote: >> don't feed the trolls >> >> http://whatreallyhappened.com/ > Don't forget http://www.collateralmurder.com/. > > Its appalling the US pilots of the helicopter make a joke and laugh > when they shoot the children ("they shouldn't have brought their kids > to work", IIRC). My bad. The Apache pilot joked, "It's their fault for bringing their kids into a battle" (at 15:28), with 'their' meaning the civilians and Reuters employees killed by the US military in an unprovoked attack.
Jeff >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Laurelai <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 10/13/2011 7:11 PM, Christian Sciberras wrote: >>> >>> > So if they cause damage for profit that makes it ok? >>> No. But it's certainly better than doing damage without profit. Making >>> profit means that at the end of the day, the money's going to go somewhere >>> further in the chain. >>> Flattening a tower, for instance, or attacking the local bank that refused >>> to give you a loan because of the time you spent in a cell, isn't as >>> productive. >>> Neither is it making a company loose clients/profit just because they >>> decided they don't want you to use their services (as if you did have a >>> right in the first place...). >>> >>> So by your logic the civil disobedience that helped sparked the >>> revolutionary war is worse than if someone had done the same acts just to >>> drive up tea prices? Again I also remind you the trickle down theory doesn't >>> work >>> >>> > And yes I acknowledge the American public has a measure of >>> > responsibility in the situation too, human beings are by nature imperfect, >>> > but the largest share of responsibility lies with the names listed below. >>> The largest share? I can see Ex-president Bush trying to sell you a bottle >>> of beer for $10 dollars ($7 profit). Wait, I can't. >>> >>> But we did see him increase deregulation and allow this to happen, we also >>> saw him provoke a war with another country based on a known lie for the sole >>> purpose of gaining resources and more control in the middle east. We saw him >>> legalize torture and saw him strip away a good chunk of our civil liberties >>> so the anti terror industry could make a buck. But like you said its ok >>> since someone is making money off of it. Who needs civil liberties anyways >>> right? >>> >>> > That sort of thing has happened to me and I paid back every dime of it, >>> > most people are decent human beings and would do the same. >>> Most people? I could have sworn 90% of the people in the NYC subway would >>> thank $deity if you suddenly dropped dead so they could get things off you. >>> Call me cynical, but I wouldn't trust anyone else in such cases, other >>> than myself. >>> >>> Frankly 90% of people on this list would just thank $deity i suddenly >>> dropped dead regardless of how much stuff i had :) >>> >>> Regarding that list of yours, great! Now we just need a little more >>> effort. For each of those persons, please enlighten us as to what they did >>> legally wrong. >>> Of course, the people that landed in jail shouldn't be counted. The "99% >>> protest" is a modern one committed to change, it just can't right wrongs by >>> pointing at jailed people. >>> >>> [SNIP] > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
