Rebuttal: Is Wikileaks overall more harmful or more beneficial to society?

First things first, this subject of rebuttal is toward Elizabeth's WIKI Leaks Arguement post.

One of the arguments against what Wikileaks is doing is that it could be considered treasonous and a threat to national security. It is not considered treasonous because technically the Wikileaks team doesn't even operate in the United States. That's right, they don't live here! It is also not a threat to our national security because 1) there isn't actually any strategies of upcoming battles that the military uses churned into the cyberspace, and 2) if terrorists were going to attack America using information that Wikileaks releases, wouldn't they have done so already?

Okay, so here's the thing with your opening statement towards wiki leaks. Your debate questions, topics, and concern points towards what wiki leaks has caused is excellent, even beyond words. However, the only thing holding your points, and arguments back is the EVIDENCE!!!

You have no proof that terrorists are not planning some big surprise attack against America. after all the 9/11 incident was said to be hidden within the governments and Presidents knowledge. If you can pull up some article on why terrorists would be holding back against some big attack would be great for your backup evidence. Also, the same goes for your main points towards national security issues with wiki leaks.



However, if you focused on how you plan to back up your plans regarding the anger that the people of America will release if the truth remains hidden from the people. Then you would be going further into the debate rebuttal ( a level 3 concern and point towards wiki leaks).

You don't want a government lying to you right? If the government does something and doesn't tell it's people what's going on, you can imagine how peeved off people would be when they found out. Especially if it's not the actual government that tells them.

Just image the riots, protests, and conflicts that will be let out if the Government keeps up his crap of concealing documents from what he calls "the people" of America. Prove this point, and your debate will be off the hook! Not including the rest of the proof and evidence I recommended that you include. For the record, I totally agree with you, and will have your back when the debate upfront finally comes.

PROMPT: COLOR PURPLE

Prompt:

- What do Celie's letters to God tell you so far about

1. Her character traits 2. Her beliefs about and relationship with God?

1.) As a young girl, Celie is constantly subjected to abuse and told she is ugly. She decides therefore that she can best ensure her survival by making herself silent and invisible. Celie’s letters to God are her only outlet and means of self-expression. To Celie, God is a distant figure, who she doubts cares about her concerns. [1st link, First Par. ]

So far, this analysis of Celie is absolutely correct. She too does feel that the only way to bypass the cruelty in her life, is by avoiding everyone (with the exception of Nettie) and ignoring the comments of others by seeing her self as an invisible figure. However, I don't understand why Celie tends to keep relying and confessing to God about her problems, if she's came to the idea that God doesn't have a care in the world for what happens to her. Releasing her feelings and expressions of self understanding to God, I guess that I can understand. After all that she's been through, I don't blame her if she feels that she is alone in this world, and see's God as her personal Diary.

2.) Like her voice, Celie’s faith is prominent but underdeveloped. Celie relies heavily on God as her listener and source of strength, but she sometimes blurs the distinction between God’s authority and that of Alphonso. She confesses that God, rather than Alphonso, killed her baby, and she never makes any association between the injustice she experiences in her life and the ability of God to overturn or prevent this injustice. [Last Par. (analysis), 2nd link]

Celie's Faith is undeniable, her will to urge forward in my opinion can not be questioned. The courage that surpasses her fear, and act of coward-like behavior is superior compared to her doubts. Her outer beauty may be in doubt and questioned by her and others, but her inner beauty is priceless and undeniable. The only characteristic that halts her personality backwards is her blindness to reality and God. Her turning point towards her beliefs and independence makes her the Shug she want's to be.

"Well, next time you come you can look at her. She ugly. Don't even look like she kin to Nettie. But she'll make the better wife. She aint smart either, and I'll just be fair, you have to watch her or she'll give away everything you own. But she can work like a man." -pg. 18

"Yeah, I say, and he give me a lynched daddy, a crazy mama, a lowdown dog of a step pa and a sister I probably won't ever see again. Anyhow, I say, the God I been praying and writing to is a man. And act just like all the other mens I know. Trifling, forgetful and lowdown." -pg. 175

Sources:

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/purple/canalysis.html

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/purple/section1.rhtml

Discussion: Is Wikileaks overall more harmful or more beneficial to society?

Opening Statement:

Too start this debate off, Wiki-Leaks hasn't truly done anything wrong. Yeah, so what. Wiki-leaks released never before seen footage of hidden government documents that a couple of white men in suits hid from the people of United States. If there is gonna be an achievement for peace, not one person can be above the law. If we ever wanna learn how to be come an independent and wise nation......................................................................................................... and to do this:

We must first start with putting our trust into our people. Hiding the truth from the state is like den eying there freedom.

All wikileaks has done is expose the truth hidden up with all of the Governments lies. It presented better evidence against the argument of what have we done, and are still doing in all these wars. For example; Afghanistan, what the hell have we been doing in Afghanistan for about 10 years or maybe so?!!! If you were to ask me, I don't buy the purpose of Governments hiding these documents was all to avoid riots, protests, etc. It was all just a a way to hide America/ Governments dirty work.

The recent leak of 90 thousands classified military documents relating to the war in Afghanistan by the website wikileaks.org has confirmed the existence of Task Force 373 - a covert U.S. military squad tasked with capturing or killing over 2,000 targets on a special list called the JPEL (Joint Prioritised Effects List).

Seem's like the Governments been creating groups that relate a little too much to Black Ops communities. None of these actions were taken into vote or even considered over any citizen with below money and wealth averages.

To my knowledge, Wikileaks has not actually caused much physical harm, especially in the last leak of the diplomatic cables. Indeed, the diplomatic cables merely showed that US diplomats held some negative views of other diplomats: I am sure that everyone realizes that no relationship is without its problems. The leak merely brought these views out into the spotlight, without actually changing much.

The most damaging harm, in my opinion, has come in the form of loss of trust within the US government. The US's inner workings are slowly being peeled apart and displayed to the whole world as a testament to the ineptitude of the US to keep its documents secret. Even though these documents themselves may not have led to much harm, the fact that they were released at all is a sign that the US government is not as secure as previously thought.

AND.......

Don't' even get me started on the arrest of Julian Assange founder of WikiLeaks. He unlike others, trully served his purpose and service to this country more than any other "solider" has.

Sources:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/wikileaks-afghanistan-documents-task-force-373-afghan-hit-squad-2644190.html

http://www.quora.com/WikiLeaks/What-harm-has-WikiLeaks-caused

RE: Peace Talk

To be honest, I came across this post by looking threw Mercedes blog posts, and I noticed a post that she responded to. The post was just so interesting!! Also it kinda reminded me of another huge assignment about peace that I had coming up, so i said why not refresh and prepare my ideas for it

"The ignorance of people can sometimes be overwhelming. Sometimes it just hits me that we, humans, the animals that have an open consouis and can feel love are the same animals that can a drop a nuke and comit genocide on a people because religious sterotypes. We are the animals that can make industries like Pixar and the Red Cross, but yet, we can also judge someone based on thier skin color or have rich and poor." (Christian Cortez)

Yeah, you are right Christian, sometimes the ignorance of people can sometimes be overwhelming, but some just learn to adapt and get use to it. Just like you, it also gets to me how something as innocent as a child who can feel love and be loved can change with just the wrong motivation, the same child can conquer and commit genocide on innocent people because of things as simple as religious stereotypes brought upon him/her by teachings. I guess we are the animals who created Blue-cross, Red-cross, and I guess even an Animation Studio (Pixar). However, it seems every little good in this world is outdone with cruel behavior committed by "the animals" we are. It's funny, we are capable of so much good in the world. But we cover up the good with harmful government facilities that are hidden from the people of America, drugs for unwanted purposes and also the monsters who decide to judge and kill others over white and black. What really seems to tick me off is that were all fighting and arguing of money. Unless the urge for more is removed from this world, then and only then will peace be brought upon us. And well, if it remains......................... THEN PEACE SHALL NEVER BE PRESENT, ATLEAST NOT DURING OUR TIME.

Free Post: Inseparable Part 1

This is the sequences of a "story" that was put together by a group I was assigned to be in. This story was organized and written in an interesting way, items were constructed to my group and we were expected to create a story out of the items (a ring spider, toy tea cup, measuring tape, Sergent mask, and nail clippers). Hope you enjoy!!

In the summer of 1983, Dr. Hamman met Natalie. There were sparks, and before they knew it Natalie became pregnant. They soon wed.

Around the fifth month the happy couple found out that not only would the baby be a boy, they were having twins. They chose the names Sean and Sidney. However, when the twins were born, they brought an odd surprise with them—they were literally joined at the hip. There was a hurried operation as the boys were separated before being given to their awaiting mother.

Without warning, the arguments began. Dr. Hamman often stormed out of the house. It didn’t take long for Natalie to decide she was fed up and begin divorce proceedings. Hamman was devastated; this was probably the point when his mental decline began.

Each parent had custody of one of the twins. Then, when they were fourteen, Sean and Sidney were both enrolled in Phoenix High School.

* * *

High school was a real bore. Teachers’ droning, homework assignments, heavy textbooks—and, of course, detentions. Sidney slammed his locker in a burst of defiance. It really wasn't fair; he had only been a minute late, because his watch was broken.
Of course, you couldn't tell that to Mrs. Hamilton, the strictest teacher in the school district. She didn't supervise the detentions she handed out, but for all Sidney knew, the teacher in charge of that might be worse.

Running out of ways to stall, he finally headed to the dreaded door.

The room was surprisingly quiet, but it was an imposed silence. He headed over to a chair in the corner without looking at anyone and immediately started his homework. He certainly didn't want to offend anyone who had ended up in this dank classroom.
After a few agonizingly slow minutes, he felt someone watching him. Sidney glanced up somewhat nervously—and nearly fell out of his chair.
The face staring back at him was his own.

* * *

Does It Matter Where You Go to College? Discussion Responce

Prompts/Questions that where chosen to respond too......

-Will you have a better life if you graduate from an elite college or university? Why/why not?

-Does It Matter Where You Go to College?

After repeatably reading these articles from the assigned debate, noticing that the debated question of whether or not if it matter where you go to a college. In this following discussion/debate, almost all of the "men" speaking their minds about this topic focused on a completely different way of looking into it. Instead of focusing on the legitimate way(s) of getting into college with fairly earned scholarships or smarts. However, the assigned debaters saw this matter in different ways. For example, some of these debaters looked upon the answer to this question in ways regarding the need of an elite college, for advancement in after college experience with an "acceptable job" waiting on you. What seems to bother me the most is almost all of these debates seem to contain the same exact purpose of having a college. They all focused towards the idea of an elite college being nothing but a plan, or start..... for the building on of future success in terms of starting to make tons of money, and what in their minds is the "successful path" to life, in my opinion is just another word for "luck in life", instead of hard work building upon each other.

If you're among the small handful of students who have stellar SAT scores and parents with several hundred thousand dollars to spend, you should seriously consider going to an elite college or university.They're nice places to hang out for four years and you'll probably learn a few things.

In my opinion, this argument above "Skip the Admissions Game" by Kevin Carey was by far the least persuasive compared to the rest of the debates. Not only did it contain the most provided amount of bull, but it also included the most talk of money equaling a successful life, and the need of it in order to attain an elite college. On top of that Kevin Carey had the biggest opinion of this debate being a joke, and him using nothing but random answering plus sarcasm.

Even if you don't, you'll still get a piece of paper signifying that you were smart enough to get in and rich enough to pay for it. People care about stuff like that.

On the other hand, out of all the mischief about money and elite colleges. There happened to be only one debate discussion post that caught my attention to being the most persuasive. This article "What You Do vs. Where You Go" by Martha (Marty) O'Connell is truly magnificent and brilliant. Unlike the rest of her "good intentional friends" she focused more on a logical term then attending an elite college meaning a big time money-maker job. Instead of stating that the only direction in the way of a successful career is college and money, she smoothly pointed out that it's not college that gets you anywhere, it's the person attending it.

The key to success in college and beyond has more to do with what students do with their time during college than where they choose to attend. A long-term study of 6,335 college graduates published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that graduating from a college where entering students have higher SAT scores -- one marker of elite colleges -- didn't pay off in higher post-graduation income. Researchers found that students who applied to several elite schools but didn't attend them -- either because of rejection or by their own choice -- are more likely to earn high incomes later than students who actually attended elite schools.

Clearly stated by Kevin Carey that money and power is respect, I laugh at the actual proof stated by Marty against his opinion. Unlike most of the debaters (I'm not saying all of them), but most, did not state proof or even a logically argument towards their point. The way she starts off here debate is even more interesting than the others. She seems to be the only debater who stands for people being key to a happy, and successful life. Just as Martha claimed, College is just a life after high school. Money has nothing to do with elite colleges and it for sure shouldn't be the determination of where you go to school. For example, like the success of Bill Gates. He was a college drop out and he still went on with life having times two the amount of money these debaters are bragging about. Just because Bush went to Yale doesn't make him a mad genius, in-fact hes a mad idiot who brought this world down to it's knees, just because he had "money & power".