Wikipedia suborned treason when they encouraged a U.S. military member to steal thousands of military secrets and then in turn published those stories on their website. Embarrassing facts came to light. Thankfully we were not in a war where those secrets could have caused more damage then they did. There was a Navy poster from World War II that stated "Loose Lips Sink Ships" and Wikipedia would have sunk a whole fleet with their reckless release of state secrets.
Liberal idiots en mass cried foul, defending the right to know.
Fast forward to the tabloid News of the World. The same liberal idiots are screaming for the literal and punitive destruction of the tabloid because it used less than legal means to acquire the information it used to embarrass various people of note. What is the difference you ask? You wonder about the double standard, perhaps? What could it be? Let's see: On the one hand we have a blatantly homosexual member of the Armed Forces with an issue with DODT. His solution to his dislike of the policy that he has sworn to uphold is treason. Liberals from one hill to the other are screaming for the release and protection of this traitor.
On the other hand, in a very similar scenario, A tabloid owned by the corporation run by Rupert Murdoch, enemy number one to those left of center, has been using less than ethical means to find and publish the unsavory private details about officials and others in Europe. The same bellowing crescendo over Wikipedia becomes a chorus of crickets in regards to News of the World.
Calls for an investigation in the United States over actions in Europe seem like a giant colossal waste of my taxes. I like FOX News. It's a nice change of pace from the government sponsored talking points on CBS,NBC,ABC, MSNBC,and CNN.
So is it okay to release damaging information if you are a liberal with malicious intent toward the United States? Ask the folks in charge, and maybe you can thank me later.
No comments:
Post a Comment