Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: US calls Assange 'enemy of state' [View all]George II
(67,782 posts)143. You skipped over the FIRST part of my quote of the TOS:
"Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office."
Got it?
Got it?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
285 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
meanwhile killing women and kids in the name of the USA gets a nobel peace prize. nt
msongs
Sep 2012
#1
Yes, we are well aware you hate Obama. But you need to put a cork in it until after the election.
kestrel91316
Sep 2012
#3
Thats right we won't allow truthiness here . Don't forget to alert on me too.
bahrbearian
Sep 2012
#6
I haven't censored anyone. You don't know the meaning of the word. I've expressed my opinion.
kestrel91316
Sep 2012
#86
You can't censor anyone. You might get a post hidden on DU but that will not
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#133
So you think we should be quiet about issues, until the time to talk about issues is past?
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#131
So I was right. You believe that Corporate Lobbyists should be free to get the
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#271
Interesting rant. Did you intend it for someone else btw? Not that I mind, I
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#274
I'm not critisizing any Dems. In fact I haven't spoken the name of a single one.
DeSwiss
Sep 2012
#152
We are all free to criticize Dems wherever we want. That is called democracy.
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#172
So, I take it you prefer Rmoney? Because like it or not, that's the choice.
kestrel91316
Sep 2012
#91
I just posted the part of the TOS you refer to...........thanks for pointing it out as well
George II
Sep 2012
#55
And after the election will be different? Who do you think you are fooling.
rhett o rick
Sep 2012
#97
"Your blatant opposition to our chosen presidential candidate is a violation of TOS." That sure is
pam4water
Sep 2012
#137
We know what the TOS says, but we dont agree with your judgement that the post is in
rhett o rick
Sep 2012
#233
YES, I understand that people disagree.....unless of course one "side" criticizes Assange's cult...
George II
Sep 2012
#251
Don't you realize you can't criticize "Saint" Julien or his supporters without recrimination?
George II
Sep 2012
#163
Criticizing A Bad Policy Of The US Government And The Inexplicable Nobel Selection Rules
cantbeserious
Sep 2012
#205
Because when they're looking for our votes is the only time they may listen
dflprincess
Sep 2012
#166
So you're not supporting "D"emocratic candidates...as we said, a violation of the TOS around here!
George II
Sep 2012
#170
constitution..first amendment. Every elected official has sworn an oath to uphold it. Citizens are
xiamiam
Sep 2012
#187
Harping on spelling errors on the internet went out with the Atari computer...........
George II
Sep 2012
#262
Neither Lieberman nor Miller ran for office as Democrats after they "crossed over"
George II
Sep 2012
#195
So where d you fit in if you think President Obama did not and does not deserve a Nobel Peace Prize?
MotherPetrie
Sep 2012
#83
Do I have your permission to start alerting on the Neo-cons prowling around posting war propaganda?
leveymg
Sep 2012
#116
Why did you skip over the first part of my post and zero in on the last part?
George II
Sep 2012
#148
Okay, since you haven't pointed any of them out I guess there are none here. So why
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#275
Hope this ends all the silly posts about how the US doesn't want to get him!
FiveGoodMen
Sep 2012
#2
Could you highlight the part in the article where it said the US did want him please as I am
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#11
They did not steal anything. They did what news organizations are supposed to do
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#149
you missed the part that classifies wikileaks with al queda. And the part that says that SPEAKING to
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#177
That was a subjective interpretation of the article, not a statement of fact FROM the article!
George II
Sep 2012
#221
Hope Assange supporters will start actually reading the articles instead of just the headlines.
jeff47
Sep 2012
#74
His "ego"? You are condeming him because of his ego? I hope you arent fooling yourself. nm
rhett o rick
Sep 2012
#142
"Excessive ego" - Sounds like the sort of denuniation made by Stalinists of the Old Comrades.
leveymg
Sep 2012
#220
Feel free to describe his attempts to avoid the consequences for rape in any other way. (nt)
jeff47
Sep 2012
#253
Well then, I am now an enemy. I follow them on Twitter, I read their blog, I
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#141
yes. beyond any doubt. Anyone who speaks with him can be prosecuted? insane.
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#27
If the death sentence is on the table for mlitary personnle speaking with assange, that means Bradle
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#32
Gee, his concerns about US intentions toward him appear to be well founded.
GliderGuider
Sep 2012
#22
Yes, The Patriot Act Killed Democracy - Any Dissent Of That Law Makes One A Terrorist
cantbeserious
Sep 2012
#206
Under The Patriot Act One Is Only To Expose The Approved Types Of Crimes
cantbeserious
Sep 2012
#207
I have defended him numerous times here on DU, but my opinion is changing...
Comrade_McKenzie
Sep 2012
#38
While I want to see him back in Sweden, I think this is a worrying development
muriel_volestrangler
Sep 2012
#50
If the USA is a force for global stability, the Force is not with us is it?
Proletariatprincess
Sep 2012
#138
I would agree with you that some things need to be kept confidential -- others, not.
gateley
Sep 2012
#193
Well, where are the people that kept saying Sweden wasn't going to extradite him and
hobbit709
Sep 2012
#47
Lack of evidence of leaking classified information. There's ample evidence for communication
jeff47
Sep 2012
#92
You are still conflating two different charges, which is probably part of why you're wrong.
jeff47
Sep 2012
#119
Designed to strike fear into the hearts of anyone who dare expose the truth about US policy.
marmar
Sep 2012
#59
That's fucking disturbing. What does that make me.... if I decide to send him $$$. n/t
Smarmie Doofus
Sep 2012
#62
Nothing you weren't yesterday. Because the headline doesn't match the contents of the article (nt)
jeff47
Sep 2012
#68
One of the potental charges against him is rape, you refusing to accept that dosn't change anything
Bodhi BloodWave
Sep 2012
#216
... The position with offence 4 is different. This is an allegation of rape. The framework list
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#284
It would be nice to see the actual declassified documents, rather than Dorling's interpretation
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#80
I don't read it the same way as the headlines imply. The context is that wikileaks is the conduit
24601
Sep 2012
#96
You're doing plenty of jumping to conclusions as to why there was an investigation
jeff47
Sep 2012
#115
Vice Presidents preside over the Senate and run nothing but their personal staffs. They are not
24601
Sep 2012
#144
The power to recommend is the power to express an opinion. Executive authority runs from
24601
Sep 2012
#248
Reuters has reported that the Obama Admin. is divided on the wisdom of prosecuting Assange...
AntiFascist
Sep 2012
#260
Anyone want to lie to us and still pretend that the US Gov't has "no interest" in Assange?
leveymg
Sep 2012
#107
Hey, Jeff - the article supports my comment. What happens to an analyst who loses his clearance?
leveymg
Sep 2012
#121
*scratches head in wonder* Are you arguing that they should allow someone who
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#124
My apologies but I wasnt responding to that part but rather the part where you said
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#217
even worse, she read about assange and wikileaks on the web. She read about them.
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#245
"THE US military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the United States "...
George II
Sep 2012
#222
this breaks my heart..Its humiliating and a violation of everything I thought my country was about
xiamiam
Sep 2012
#189
Describe the tyranny Assange has exposed, aside from his own assistance of the Taliban?
mzmolly
Sep 2012
#236
Uh huh. You let me know when you figure out what Assange's great contribution to humanity is.
mzmolly
Sep 2012
#270
Scoop has a link to pdf of the actual FOIA release: it doesn't seem to show what Dorling claims:
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#223
People may not understand what the UCMJ "communicating with the enemy" offense
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#228
Aiding the Enemy (UCMJ art. 104). Five separate acts are made punishable by this article ...
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#283
Personally speaking, I was put on many "lists" of political enemies of (fill in the blank) about 49
bobthedrummer
Sep 2012
#230