A Letter from Anonymous

reply to post by soficrow


they want to be able to download free music that belongs to someone else, who doesn't want to give it away, whether that's the distributor, the agent, or the artist, it's all the same banana. you can bet your bottom dollar, if recording artists and movie/tv stars, could no longer earn money from the sale of their talents, because it was being distributed for free to a socially impoverished planet (deliberate impoverishment, i might add), they would be hot under the collar. these guy sit in million dollar mansions and ride on million dollar custom designed personal yachts and lear jets, and tell the rest of us we need to tighten our belts and put mercury light bulbs in our homes and pay carbon taxes, oh yeah, and give away our intellectual property for free.. whole thing is upside down and inside out.

reply to post by undo

they want to be able to download free music that belongs to someone else, who doesn't want to give it away, whether that's the distributor, the agent, or the artist, it's all the same banana.

Nope. Completely different bananas.

The artists want to get paid, get bubkas.

you can bet your bottom dollar, if recording artists and movie/tv stars, could no longer earn money from the sale of their talents,

The ones who make big $$ make it on their business talent - and role as producer/investor/other. Those who just get paid for their performance make relatively little.

whole thing is upside down and inside out.

No kidding!!!

reply to post by Section31


and what are they gnawing away at? capitalism. companies that make money. even small companies. anybody that makes money. they are being convinced that earning your days wages/salary is equivalent to stealing from the guy next door, who wants you to give him your stuff for free. and although that's very biblical, in the sense of helping others, this was supposed to be a personal choice, not a forced labor state.

Originally posted by undo
it also frustrates the hell out of me that men who follow these organizations think they have to enlighten me, as if my gender somehow dropped my intelligence level, ability to comprehend or rationalize, by several IQ points.

Sorry Undo couldn't help myself

reply to post by soficrow


well let's see, the distributor has to make money in order to pay the next guy in line, up the chain to the artist. if the artist isn't giving it away for free, then the distributor is not required to give it away either. i knew of a christian male artist named keith green (which see), who decided one day to just give away his records and survive on donations alone. he recalled all his material from stores, and issued a notice that he would no longer sell these items but give them away. if you wanted to donate to his ministry, fine, otherwise, it was all free. he cut the distributor right out of the chain. why don't movie stars and music stars do that? cause they want MONEY. they want money but they don't want you to want money. nor do they think you need to make money. nor do they think their enemies should make money. and their enemies are anyone who makes money, other than them. lol

it's a circus!

reply to post by undo

Do I have a right to pursue any means to make myself happy? According to the Constitution of the United States, I have a right to make money so I can buy a house, car, food, etc... Anonymous comes in the name of freedom, but they don't seem to recognize the freedom of everyone. If we had forced labor in the United States, people would not be allowed to chose where they go to school and work. We have the freedom of choice in the United States. Where you end up in the spectrum is based upon how much you invest into your own life.

You are responsible for your own destiny.

(Where this conversation started: CLICK HERE.)

reply to post by Section31


which is good in principle and actually worked well for a long time. it's getting a little rough around the edges lately, since we decided to let our companies move off shore to enjoy cheap labor (whatdya wanna bet, this all started when globally, competitors who had access to slave labor, tried to drum the usa out of business by continually under pricing us, meanwhile, here in the states, the prices of things went up and up, due to the arrival of unions, which are both a good and bad thing, all wrapped into one heckuva a problem package).

if the rest of the planet actually paid their employees a living salary, none of that would've been necessary.

reply to post by Prince Of Darkness


Roger that.
Over.....




clicclic
And the Light dispells all shadows.
Light conquers darkness.....every day.
no?

reply to post by undo


Its not about Stalinism,or any other ism but a way to moderate the growing populace into agreement with fundamental changes to social and enviromental factors because of media coverage from non de ploums
Yes you are correct about being voted either way,after all we all make choices everyday,but sometimes those choices are not our own,and people are reminded of this through these agendas daily.
When a non de ploum does`nt have any power then coverage is allowed to amass so that individual is the foremost authority in everybodies eyes.However just like hitler for example,if no one questions motives then we have another modern day anarchist hitler destroying everybodies safety and welfare,thats everybody !already russia is belittling the states,I`m not a huge fan but this whole thing is exposing hatred and mistrust,is that really good for us all,a minority can soon become a majority then what,terminator scenario.

reply to post by gringoboy


i see what you mean, but would also like to reiterate, that it's the concept involved, that i'm referring to. the idea that if it weren't for laws clarifying what it means to be free in the usa (bill of rights, for example), we would literally go around and around in circles voting for each other's gag orders. voting for each other's disenfranchisement. do you see what i mean? let's say you have a business that creates hammers and are quite well off financially, because of it, but you are also a republican or an independent, politically, and donate large sums of money to their platforms. the socialist, communist and democratic parties, would be climbing all over themselves to see if they could defame you by pointing to your money. it's a magician's trick. don't look at what this hand is doing (the one they're using to rake in huge sums of money for themselves), rather, look at this hand that is pointing at that greedy hammer company capitalist pig, etc etc.

republicans and independents have joined the smear war, by revealing things like al gore leaving his suv running during a conference on lowering carbon emissions, and pelosi riding expensive jets to places while asking everyone else to tighten their belts and bite the bread crumbs and say "yum." but they are also playing a magician's trick. watch this hand (that's pretending it's actually capitalistic) whilst the other hand is signing pretty much all the same bills, and conveniently doesn't manage to stop huge tax burdens until they're so set in stone it would take a miracle to dislodge them without hurting billions of people. or responding to "we need to lower military spending" by cutting the paychecks of the poorest members of the military.

etc etc etc. ya know what i mean, etc.

in effect, if we didn't have a bill of rights, this place would be a madhouse, because "the people" are a mob!

Infact if you combine scientology and the agendas of Anonymous,wiki Etc you will get a new world order,one that functions perfectly well for TPTB.Careful what you agree too ,spin is not dead its all around and is spinning around this whole issue of disclosure.TPTB will disclose what they want to,to please the masses,then sweep in big brother,big style.new technologies need reasons to be implemented at social levels and to be accepted,and to be accepted need a medium to get folks to agree.Non de ploums fit the bill,lee harvey oswalds are everywhere and they will find them.

reply to post by undo


That is very big leap from an informed public to a lynch mob. Perhaps you didn't get my point. It is the nonviolent revolt that makes this challenge to the establishment such a positive thing. All that is being abused or destroyed is cyber space. No human, animal, or shelter is being taken out, just web sites.

Further more from what you seem to be arguing, the public should be kept ignorant of the facts of geo political dealings. That being informed makes people mindless and violent. That sounds like a typical argument from the establishment. That people are not intelligent enough to handle the truth, and therefor should allow the elite to manage the planet.

Now I am aware that wikileaks may be disseminating false information. That is up to each individual who reads it to decide. Whether or not something is true should not determine whether people should be given the opportunity to hear it, and judge for them selves.

It's is that flow of information that anonymous is fighting for, and they are fighting in the appropriate battle ground. From what I can tell the worst collateral damage an innocent victim can get from this attack is being forced to tell a client they'll have to pay by check, that's a far cry from a lynching.

reply to post by Theorytripper


that's the problem in a nutshell. it could be disseminating, in the guise of giving "the people" the truth, total rubbish, or it could be telling the truth, or any combination thereof, but currently the attitude is, that anything on wiki leaks is like gospel truth: from god's lips to your ear. and since the current stance on the western world, by non-western nations is, that it is an evil entity bent on world domination, anything that'll add fuel to that fire, is good for the very same reason that mob mentality incites riots and revolutions. i'm not condoning decisions made by western countries, but i can tell you right now, i prefer this crazy mixed up place to a shar'ia law country or living in russia, china, cuba, south africa or some of the other less than friendly places on the planet.

reply to post by undo

If we do not protect the freedom for all United States citizens, we become similar to those in which we seek to teach (The Corrupt). Whatever happened to practice what you preach? Anonymous only cares about anarchy.

(Where this conversation started: CLICK HERE & HERE.)

reply to post by Section31


oh i agree, anon should have the right to free speech as should assange and any would be whistle blowers. what i have a problem with is the motivation behind it, the veracity of the claims, the way it'll be interpreted locally, and the near religious fervor it's been afforded by its proponents.

reply to post by undo


The fact the living in the west is far better then many other regions of the world is irrelevant to this argument. All media everywhere colors the truth with it's slant. Whether from the NY times or al jazzer one will always get some propaganda mixed with truth. As for people thinking wikileaks is the gospel truth, I disagree. All I've heard on this site is arguments that this is disinformation, and that's great. Let's look at the information, debate it and come to personal conclusions about what is being released to us, that is freedom.

reply to post by Theorytripper


Yes Mr assange is cutting out the Editor so to speak as any Journalist knows there are government censorship guidelines they have to follow ,so yes good on him for that,But,and its a big BUT ,who can stop what he and they have,and where is it going to lead ,do you or anybody know,Is`nt that how hitlerites started !Think,where can you imagine this is going to lead,its not rocket science.We are talking about governments here, not ,you,me and local idioms about personal grievances,once governments stop functioning TPTB are not affected they have safety plans,its all of society that is affected,we starve they become satisfied and remind us all how we depend on the structure they run,the carrot and the stick.Or populace Psychology sheparding

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Section31

 

Oh, I agree, Anon should have the right to free speech as should Assange and any would be whistle blowers.

So... When Anonymous attacks a privately owned business practicing their rights, how are they representing 'everyone's' rights to freely refuse to do business with Assange? Companies within the United States are allowed to chose who they do business with. It is their freedom and right. It is also considered a practice of their freedom to pursue happiness.

(Where this conversation started: CLICK HERE & HERE & HERE.)

reply to post by Theorytripper


i agree EXCEPT for the part where it endangers the lives of others. that's where the truth is not such a good thing.
some truth is so inconvenient that it requires careful consideration.

reply to post by Section31


i agree with you on that as well. they can exercise their free speech but not at the expense of everyone else, otherwise, it's like spitting into the wind.