"A government is like soylent green. It's made of people but they're not recognized as people." - Quotes of Michael Dinowitz
It is hypocrisy. Assange distributed stolen property that angered people. Someone distributed stolen property that angered Assange's lawyer. The first case involved government communications while the second case involved government (police) files. Both are official government documents. There is no difference just because the subject of one might be a government official or act and the subject of the other is a celebrity in the public eye. When does one lose their rights to privacy? What job makes them lose it? Who decides? If you take a government contract do you expect all of your information and reviews of your actions to become public knowledge? On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Imagine that, Eric used the 'its different' defense. > > On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Eric Roberts > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Irony...yes...hypocrisy, no. As a individual, he does have an expectation >> of privacy. The government...non ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:332770 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
