Yes. Really. "I used to support you until I had these Concerns!" == concern trolling.
Again, no. Concern trolling is defined by the intent to disrupt the discourse by falsely representing one's motivations, not by the simple presence of a clause stating that "I don't believe x anymore" - particularly when the statement as in this case was a simple, if heated refutation of the stupid claim that "everyone used to believe in x until a week ago, so anyone who says they don't believe in it now is an American sockpuppet". But I think you know that, you just enjoy calling people names. If you really thought I were a troll, aren't you a little old to be feeding the likes of me?
Your hand waving and butthurt attempt at avoidance are noted.
What, like in a little black book or something? That sounds kind of authoritarian.
Yes that really is the issue right there, isn't it? Because either wikileaks is a publisher, and Julian is editor-in-chief and responsible for policy, or blah blah blah blah
Word salad is boring and needs more radishes.
And your failure to address the substance of a literally a single one of the points I made shows just how empty your argument is. Except it's not really argument is it, it's just name-calling informed by anarcho-syndicalist dogmatism - or somesuch drivel - tossed off without a thought. You don't have to stick to the party line on every bloody thing you know, you're allowed to have your own thoughts. Or a debate, with someone who probably agrees with you on more positions than not.
You just gave the definition of a concern troll.
Not really, no, given the topic of the OP and the ludicrous assertions in the post I was responding to that essentially claimed all criticism of Assange had sprung up in the last week from "an [sic] US army of armchair warriors". But don't let facts and context get in the way when you're on troll roll, eh?
Wow. If I end up saying something stupid, I don't make a point of referencing the stupidity later on:
I very happily stand by my judgement and comments. You on the other hand seem to be suffering butthurt because... I don't know, your idol turned out to have feet of clay? That's ok, It happens to everyone, but you'll grow out of it. Leaktivism will (hopefully) survive Assange the Dick.
Wikileaks is in the publishing business, not the hacking business.
Yes that really is the issue right there, isn't it? Because either wikileaks is a publisher, and Julian is editor-in-chief and responsible for policy, or it's a dumb pastebin/liveleaks type dumping ground and what role does that leave for him? And when you have the editor/figurehead/sometime-saint on the one hand saying that wikileaks' policy is fighting for openness and justice, even offering to sacrifice his own limited freedom to obtain clemency for Manning, and then on the other hand acting not only in a blatantly partisan fashion - remember wikileaks' criticism of Panama papers? The October surprise? Threats to release personal details of journalists families? but straight out in cowardly bad faith - no wikileaks material on Putin at all, no follow through on the Manning quid pro quo - then you have right there an enormous, flaming, king-size hypocrite.
2) Russian handlers? That's so stupid it's not worth responding to.
Indulge me and my stupidity, and respond anyway. Before you do, how about actually read the link in my old stupid comment to an eyewitness account from a Russian dissident, also look up the definitions of "mouthpiece" and "stooge". The best assets don't even ask to be paid in vodka or big macs, they do it for free because they've got their own motivations.
At your next troll meeting, you might suggest that you and your fellow trolls back up these character attacks on Assange, so you can't be dismissed as tools in
Ecuadorian mom's basement
Furthermore, the original model was proven wrong, leaving pro-global warmists without even a predictive model to cling to.
Seriously, what the righteous fuck are you talking about? Is your argument going to consist of a series of utterly unsupported assertions, or are you ever going to back up this shit with citations?
Oh, and I do read the journals, and know how to interpret the results - I'm a physics PhD so better than you, I almost guarantee it - and that plus the fact that I have kids and care about the world they are going to inherit is what made me and makes me passionate about the subject, not some fucking shill with an agenda in a Youtube video. Look, it occurs to me now from your language that you're actually 16 years old, in which case I forgive you, and suggest you get an actual education and stop looking at Youtube so much. Otherwise, again, grow up.
When you are working hard, get up and retch every so often.