eponinethen said:
Wrong. Copying files from the internet is not illegal in most of the world, according to rules of fair use. Just copying is not theft. Theft is when person A takes a physical object from person B, who then is no longer in possession of that object. It's true that those who copy copyrighted music or whatever to burn and sell for profit, are criminals - but most people don't do that..
Did I say anything about the rest of the world in my post? No, my post was about the piracy in the United States, so anything you say about the rest of the world is irrelevant to this discussion.
And yes the copying of music onto your computer and distributing it is the exact same thing as burning a million CDs and selling them. Because the people who download these songs from you could be just doing that.
And are you sure you know the exact definition of theft, since I assume it would have to be reprised because of the information age. And I do believe that theft does not have to involve physical objects. You can thieve information, data et cetera.
So yes, downloading music is theft because your simply receiving the service but your not paying for it.
eponinethen said:
If one thing should be clear by no - admitted by the Bush government - it is that the Saddam regime had nothing what so ever to do with Al-Queda or Usama or any known terrorists. Nor were there any WMD.
While I, like most people, don't regret that Saddam is overthrown, thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqians have been killed by US troops. Was it worth it for them? "Protecting" your country is more worth than their lives..?
You say that you "had" to take out terrorists like Usama and Saddam cause they hid terrorrists.. But most of the 9/11 bombers were Saudis.. (Wanna start a war there too..?)
Are you completely forgetting a little thing called Desert Storm? Where Saddam practically engaged in genocide of the citizens of Kuwait in which he used WMD.
Yes it does feel bad to know that innocent Iraqis were killed by this war, but whose to say they wouldn't have been killed by Saddam, who knows he wouldn't have brought war upon himself. Right before the war, he was trying to get his hands on WMD. What if we hadn't invaded and Saddam would have gotten what he wanted? Would you still continue on with your little liberal rants?
Not to mention that the three most powerful countries in the world received the same intel that said that Saddam was in fact hiding of WMD destruction. Granted that this information was faulty, it was enough of proof to go to war with him.
Although now we know there was no WMD, we admit that. But were creating a new democratic society that used to be overpowered by a foul dictator.
And were not going to start wars with everyone because terrorists are from there countries, were trying to fight a war against these agencies of terror. DUH! If we wanted to start a war with everyone country that had a citizen who was a terrorist, then there would be a lot more wars on our hand.
