Wikileaks would be considered a national threat because by definition of the Sedition Act which is to write, print, utter or publish scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States with intent to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations. Julian Assange himself said in an interview, "I enjoy creating systems on a grand scale, and I enjoy helping people who are vulnerable. And I enjoy crushing bastards. So it is enjoyable work," thus reaffirming the definition of the Sedition Act and emphasizing the definition of intent which is "the state of a person's mind that directs his or her actions toward a specific object."

Weezy

I mean, not only is he a mad genious with a degree in psycology, but also he never forgot his home and after Katrina he was ON the streets helpin to rebuild our city. You dont see nobody else that in touch with their roots and he is to be greatly admired for such generosity and for being an outstanding leader in the New Orleans area.

Yea, itd be pretty funny lol itd sure make facebook more interesting and dramaful

nickiminaj. She is da baddest bxtch in da whole world. Young money reppin it. She a actress, model, singer, rapper, artist. She DOPE!

There is no way to prove that suicides are directly linked to this.

No. First of all, we already have laws in place. Harassment laws and Child Protection laws already cover this. Why would the govt waste time making a law for something thats already covered?

Also, this is just a new form of old abuse. In Egypt, they have unearthed ancient enscriptions of defamatory speech towards various people. Say we do make cyberbullying a federal offense; bullies will just find another outlet for harassment. A simple joke could land you in jail, and in turn ruin your future. Also, theres no way to prove who is sitting behind the screen typing the material, so people could be easily framed. Futhermore, by drafting a law to make it a felony, wouldnt it only inflame the so-called problem? For example, in Italy, there is no set age for alchohal consumption, whereas in America, there is a strictly enforced law stating that one must be 21 years or older in order to drink alchohal. Italy has virtually no alchohal related crimes whereas most crimes in America are directly linked with alchohal. In other words, wouldnt a law only draw attention to the problem and make it more of a "taboo" factor that teens are more prone to break? If there is no law then there is no urge for rebellion to break that law. Therefore, a law would only make cyberbullying more "fun" for the bullies doing it.

I definatley think so. I mean, look at how women were so repected during the victorian age, for example. I think it all changed during the feminist movement of the 1960s when women tried to be equal with men, when in actuality, the deserve to be courted and respected. Its really annoying to see the way our culture has evolved into turning guys into the complete assholes they are. Now, not all guys, but alot of them, dont respect women because women no longer demand/require that level of respect. So yea, there may be more douchebags out there, but theres also alot more sluts to even out the ratio.

(assuming you live in america) THIS ALREADY EXISTS. Why should the government WASTE money in order to supply citizens with the option to not partake in choosing their leader, when people who remain indifferent to politics can just stay home? No one literally "forces" people to vote, hence the term "democracy." Also, for those indifferent people who wish to have a "none of the above choice," wouldnt it be a waste of THEIR money, on gas or bus fares and such in order to get to the actual poles and vote? Also, I know in my community lines for voting are massive- as far as the eye can see- and voting is a long process, so why would anyone want to waste their time waiting in line to vote and going through the whole ordeal when they dont even want to choose a leader! A "none of the above" option and just staying home and not voting are having the same impact on the outcome of the political race. Why the government would invest money into doing something so stupid with so little impact is beyond me, I mean, wouldnt it just encourage more pervasive indifferance throughout our country?!? Instead, the alternative would be to educate those who wish to vote for "none of the above" about the candidates views and policies. Education is the answer, and by adding a "none of the above" option (which was ignorant to begin with) less people will care about the fate of their country, which ultimatley rests in their hands. We need to provide citizens with eduaction about politcs and their country in order to promote a sense of unity and nationalism, rather than wide-spread ignorance and indifferance. This is why I negate the resoulution that "voters should be given a choice for none of the above," and instead affirm the position that not only does this option already exist, but indifferance should instead be converted into nationalism.

The purpose of the white crayon is to create different effects throughout your peice. Crayons, made of wax, blend smoothy if they are of quality (even expensive colored pencils have wax in them to make them blend smoother), and on that note, white aids the progression of color whilst blending. White crayons can be used for highlights and lightsources as well as creating all together new colors. I know this from personal expeirence, because I was always that one kid in kindegarten who sat in a corner and just drew all day, as opposed to playing outside (not to say that I still am not like that, because I totally am, lol) But yea, white just helps with shading, blending, smoothing, and highlighting, and also creating all together new hues.

I affirm the position of being shocked and disgusted with the release of the cables on Wikileaks. First of all, the Internet is a unique and universal medium which can be accessed by millions upon millions of people. By posting these series of documents on Wikileaks, Julian Assange has essentially destroyed America's efforts to bring peace to the middle east, north Korea, and many of America's diplomatic relations world wide have been severly damaged. As secretary of state Hillary Clinton states, "It would take years to undo the damage caused by the wikileaks revelations," comparing her recent tour of the middle east to an "apology tour." she states that "I think that I will be answering concerns about Wikileaks for the rest of my life, not just the tenure as secretary of state."

DIPLOMACY.

Diplomacy is the art of getting another country to do what it doesn't really want to do. The failure of diplomacy, is war.

What Julian Assange fails to see is that diplomacy needs secrecy. There is a sensible middle ground somewhere between the culture of secrecy that dominates now, and the kind of indiscriminate dumping that seems to be the goal of Julian Assange and Wikileaks. Obviously, for any kind of government or diplomacy to be successful, some things are just legitimately secret. For example, Wikileaks has released the identities of individuals in Afghanistan who were working secretly with Americans and supplying them with important information and such, but now, the Taliban has gotten ahold of Wikileaks and publicly declared that they will hunt down and kill these people. Yes, Wikileaks eventually redacted some names, but there were other key factors in identifying these people. Also, the taliban doesn't strive to correctly identify these people helping the Americans, for they simply wish to strike fear into the hearts of the survivors. Furthermore, wikileaks has jeopardized America's image amongst many countries worldwide. It exposed files that ridiculed everyone from Hamid Karzai to Dmitry Medvedev. As a result of Wikileaks, Yemen has become hostile towards America, stating that they refuse to act peaceably towards our nation and that they will begin breeding terrorists to attack us. Also, due to the release of Wikileaks, many countries, dignitaries, diplomats, foreign officials, and civilians will think more than twice before telling America something sensitive. They will ask themselves, "Can America be trusted? Can America keep a secret?" I mean, how do people think we obtain intelligence here?!?! ITS ALL THROUGH THE COOPERATION OF OUR INTELLIGENCE SOURCES. Now, it going to be much harder for Americans to obtain information. Furthermore, it was already difficult enough gaining trust from foreigners. Now, America faces an even harder task; trying to rebuild trust lost.

Trust between foreigners and American officials is like a mirror, you can fix it if its broken, but you can still see that crack in Americas Reflection. That crack, of course, being Wikileaks.