Hello:

I'm all for keeping secret THAT which will HARM my country... In fact, I STILL have my secret clearance, and I have NEVER divulged what I know, nor will I EVER. However, I'm all for exposing THAT which embarrasses those in power. That's because if they did RIGHT, they wouldn't BE embarrassed. In fact, it's my view that a journalists job is to expose the truth.

The righty's think, I suppose, that a journalists job is to keep secrets that enable government... They certainly didn't like it when the Rolling Stone told the truth about McCrystal... And, they ain't going to like this leak any better.

Oh, by the way.. If you didn't know, the leak detailed widespread torture by the Iraqi's on their fellow citizens while WE stood by and did NOTHING. I thought we went there to get RID of that big bad torturer... Or was it WMD's?

excon

Leaking documents that are classified is a crime, and should be prosecuted. There are laws on the books... enforce them.

As you are fully aware if you have ever held a clearance... its not up to you or me to determine what should or should not be considered classified. THAT is left to those in charge. Once they have been unclassified... then they are fair game.

I think we went there for money. We didn't learn anything from South America... or did we? As for the "secrets" who is making these decisions? Throughout the history of the US our military and other US organizations have done things the people would consider unethical. People still debate over dropping the atom bombs on Japan, and that wasn't even "secret"!

Hello smoothy:

So, you're FOR the government keeping stuff secret simply because it EMBARRASSES them? I thought you didn't like the government too much...

excon

Smoothly, there are laws against these secret actions as well(not the secrecy but the ethics). You are basically saying they can do what they want and should be able to keep it a secret. The people making the decisions have to be held accountable for them no matter how secret they are. We should not have laws that give our government the right to commit atrocities and get away with it. Wrong is wrong!

As you are fully aware if you have ever held a clearance....Hello again, smoothy:

The correct word would be SINCE I held a clearance... I'm getting tired of your suggestions that I lie.

excon

Hello smoothy:

So, you're FOR the government keeping stuff secret simply because it EMBARRASSES them? I thought you didn't like the government too much...

excon

Classified documents are classified for a reason... and can only be declassified by a select few individuals for a reason... its not for you ore me to decide. You do remember those forms you signed when you got the clearance.

Opinion doesn't come into play here...

Classified documents are classified for a reason....and can only be declassified by a select few individuals for a reason...its not for you ore me to decide. So you trust your government then.

This time they also showed some other things (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/108490/):


I SAID BEFORE THAT WIKILEAKS’ JULIAN ASSANGE WAS CLEARLY A TOOL, BUT WHOSE? Well, so far the two biggest scoops from the latest document dump are that the infamous Lancet study was bogus (http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/wikileaks_nails_the_wild_lancet_scare/), and that WMDs were found in Iraq in quantity (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/). Neither of these stories is actually news to people who were paying attention, but now — conveniently enough just before an election, and even nicely timed for George W. Bush’s new book release — these stories are getting a fresh round of play.. .

Told you so.

Hello again, smoothy:

The correct word would be SINCE I held a clearance... I'm getting tired of your suggestions that I lie.

excon

Feeling guilty then? Because YOU said that... not me. Don't put words in my mouth. IF you ever held a clearance simply means you once held one and its no longer active... There are likely people reading this thread that applies to. Most don't follow you to the grave and will be deactivated if they aren't used. And you can have different ones, at the same time.

Because you once had one doesn't mean you have one now or that its active.

YOU were the only person here getting touchy about it.

You did read those forms... nowhere does it give you an option to ignore them if you feel the topics should be discussed or reveled to others NOT in the need to know. Just because an individual HAS a clearance, doesn't mean they have the right to read documents they do not have a need to know about.

And yes... you can get in deep crap for snooping around even without revealing anything to outside individuals even WITH a clearance.

And even if you was written off... non-disclosure agreements stay with you for the period specified in them... some may have a limit.. others are indefinite in duration. And are legally enforcible.

IF the documents were classified... throw the book at those involved, all of them... if they were declassified... then it's a whole different ballgame.

This time they also showed some other things (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/108490/):



Told ya so.
a) So the Bush administration made secret documents that validated their reason for invasion? Really?

b) if you had read the article it says the "hunt for WMD continued", they found mustard gas which I don't think is a WMD.

Told ya so.Hello Steve:

So, the leak was GOOD... I would have NEVER known there were WMD's if Assange hadn't spoken out. George Bush is a fine man...

But... If there really WERE WMD's, why would that fine man, George W. Bush keep it secret?? It Would have vindicated him, no??

You guys are silly.

excon

Smoothly, there are laws against these secret actions as well(not the secrecy but the ethics). You are basically saying they can do what they want and should be able to keep it a secret. The people making the decisions have to be held accountable for them no matter how secret they are. We should not have laws that give our government the right to commit atrocities and get away with it. Wrong is wrong!

Then you report them to the right channels.. there will be ways within your organization do do so without causing a breach... if you violate the law in respect to classified documents.. THAT alone will ruin your life or get you a lengthy prison term. Under the law and terms of your security clearance... YOU the individual, do not get to make that distinction. Classified is classified. Legally any disclosure is a breach... and prosecutable. And these people are NOT the people you want to screw with.

smoothy, you do know what happens to snitches in the military right?

Incidentally... the President is one person with the ability to declassify documents... sometimes its done with good reason.. sometimes its not.

You guys are silly.

As silly as calling Bush the liar when virtually everyone, including the UN and countless Democrats believed Saddam had WMD's. As silly as believing the Lancet study? As silly as buying into a health care bill that no one had read? As silly as electing a narcissistic amateur for president? As silly as believing the Tea Party is nothing but racist bigots that threaten our very survival? As silly as believing the gulf spill was going to destroy us?

Yeah, don't talk to me about silly.

As silly as calling Bush the liar when virtually everyone, including the UN and countless Democrats believed Saddam had WMD's. As silly as believing the Lancet study? As silly as buying into a health care bill that no one had read? As silly as electing a narcissistic amateur for president? As silly as believing the Tea Party is nothing but racist bigots that threaten our very survival? As silly as believing the gulf spill was going to destroy us?

Yeah, don't talk to me about silly.Obama and the Tea Party aren't the subject of this post. The subject is "Wikki leaked again."

For the original version of this see here (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/joe-miller-arrests-reporter-517782-2.html#post2572246).
:)

smoothy, you do know what happens to snitches in the military right?

Oh yeah... or people that like to push the limits or rules... or not do exactly what they were told exactly HOW they were told to do it... you can't kick their butts like they could 40 years ago... but there are a multitude of ways they can legally make your life a living hell if you don't comport yourself as a proper soldier... by the commands expectations.

A good friend I once worked with was a retired Command Sergant Major... he taught me a lot of tricks I had never heard of before (or even thought of).

Reporting incidents... and snitching isn't always the same thing... but that line CAN be very thin between them at times. There are always repercussions... something to consider before making a report. Many times there is a choice of the lesser of two evils... and Command doesn't tell the lesser ranking people everything... only what they need to know. That makes for a possibility a Trooper doesn't see things in their full context to make a decision about what is and isn't right.

There is some useful information in these leaks ,that although not revelations ,confirm some of the things I've said about Iranian involvement . We have in fact been in a shooting war with Iran for many years now.
The roadside bombs are made in Iran ,and they trained the users. They designed homicide vests for terrorists to use against the troops and the Iraqi people. Many of the so called "insurgents " were professional Iranian operatives of the Qod branch of the IRG. It reports and documents incidents of Iranian intelligence officers fighting alongside the enemy inside Iraqand manning checkpoints with local militias.
There is also proof that the American hikers were on the Iraqi side of the border and were kidnapped by the Iranians.

The soldiers deployed to theater have a right to ask the political leaders of the last 10 years why no action was taken against the Iranian regime especially against their IED manufacturing facilities and their terrorist training camps.

Ex the files also show that there were occasions when US troops did intervene against the Saddam-like torture by Iraqi prison guards ; and the blind-eye policy was eventually and rightly changed.

Julian Assange is a deranged rapist . Nuff said . Yes there still should be secrets. There are operatives on the run in AfPakia thanks to the previous doc dump.

Obama and the Tea Party aren't the subject of this post. The subject is "Wikki leaked again."

Ex changed it to "silly."

American politics is silly be definition so you got me there.

Hello:

I'm all for keeping secret THAT which will HARM my country... In fact, I STILL have my secret clearance, and I have NEVER divulged what I know, nor will I EVER. However, I'm all for exposing THAT which embarrasses those in power. That's because if they did RIGHT, they wouldn't BE embarrassed. In fact, it's my view that a journalists job is to expose the truth.

The righty's think, I suppose, that a journalists job is to keep secrets that enable government... They certainly didn't like it when the Rolling Stone told the truth about McCrystal... And, they ain't gonna like this leak any better.

Oh, by the way.. If you didn't know, the leak detailed widespread torture by the Iraqi's on their fellow citizens while WE stood by and did NOTHING. I thought we went there to get RID of that big bad torturer.... Or was it WMD's??

excon
Personally Ex I think the reasons the US, along with the rest of us, went into Iraq are somewhat confused and if it was with the expectation of removing a middle eastern repressive regime that was very niaive indeed.

I am fed up with spin, ex, and I think many others are also. Many people were killed in Iraq who didn't need to die. Ok no Americans were killed on home soil, but that doesn't excuse the losses in Iraq and the destruction of the country. It would appear that 100 Iraqi might have died for every american killed in 9/11, not justice by any measure, particularly since America was already waging war on the perpetrators and allegedly still is.

Wikileaks has done a valuable service, it has enabled us to see where we have been lied to

So a delusional paranoid rapist ,and a geeky Army Pfc. Bradley Manning know better what should remain classified than the elected Executive of the countries involved in the war against jihadistan ,the leaders of the diplomatic corp ,the chiefs of the intelligence services , and the top military brass??
No thanks . I don't recall Manning's or Jullian Assange's name on any ballot I cast .

So a delusional paranoid rapist ,and a geeky Army Pfc. Bradley Manning know better what should remain classified Hello again, tom:

I say again.. IF what they're hiding EMBARRASSES them rather than exposes SECRETS, then the information SHOULD be exposed, even by deranged people. Period. End of story.

excon

The ad hominems are signs that they don't have a retort with substance.

What they in fact released is a bunch of unvetted documents without content. Little of it is news to anyone who has followed the war.
What's news ? Iraqis are brutal jailers ? No .Saddam had WMD ? No . A lot of Iraqi's have died at the hands of the Iranian and Al Qaeda led "insurgency " ? No. Iran's involvement ? No .


What bothers me is that buried in these unvetted docs is surely similar examples to the last Wiki-dump. Intelligence that does not embarrass but instead puts intelligence assets in danger.
I submit that PFC Mattingly doesn't know jack about the real implications of his illegal theft .

Jullian Assange is so deranged that he couldn't care less. If I were him I'd be paranoid too . There are a lot of brave people on the run today because of his irresponsible ego trip.

NK ,everything I said about both are fact.

Hello again, tom:

I say again.. IF what they're hiding EMBARRASSES them rather than exposes SECRETS, then the information SHOULD be exposed, even by deranged people. Period. End of story.

excon

If there were classified documents... what they actually contain is irrelevant.

There is a big difference between (unclassified) embarrassing documents and Classified documents.

There is a big difference between (unclassified) embarrassing documents and Classified documents.Hello again, smoothy:

That would be true IF they DIDN'T classify documents that EMBARRASS them in exactly the same way as documents that are indeed SECRET. But, they DO, and THAT'S the problem.

One is to protect the country. The other is to protect their a$$. I'm not in to protecting a bureaucrats a$$. You?? I guess you are.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

That would be true IF they DIDN'T classify documents that EMBARRASS them exactly the same as documents that are indeed SECRET. But, they DO, and THAT'S the problem.

One is to protect the country. The other is to protect their a$$. I'm not into protecting a bureaucrats a$$. You??? I guess you are.

exconWell, look who you elected two years ago... his Birth Certificate, his college records... everything about his past is either classified or under a court ordered seal. Want to talk about what is BS. THAT is what is the real BS.

Fact is... whatever the reason something is classified... its classified. There is no gray area for Joe Average. Yeah certain politicians get away with it... but most of us can and will get sent up the river if we violate the law pertaining to classified documents.

Do YOU want the blood of Soldiers, operatives or agents on your hands because you had this burning need to violate the law for a political agenda? Because often that is exactly what will happen. Plus by the very nature of how this all works... you can't possible know what is tied to what else and how... bits of seemingly irrelevant information usually is the key to figuring out other things... who are you or I or some idiots at wikileaks with an agenda to get our people killed to determine exactly what bits mean nothing or mean something. After all, someone without an agenda saw reason to classify them in the first place.

Word for the day... Compartmentalization. Understand that as it relates to this topic and you understand WHY there is a problem.

After all, someone without an agenda saw reason to classify them in the first place.Hello again, smoothy:

We disagree. And, for a Tea Partier, you sure do TRUST the government a whole lot. I don't suffer from that affliction. I NEVER trust 'em! That's NEVER!

If they classified stuff for the sole reason of a COVER UP, then they absolutely HAD an agenda. This leak revealed lie after lie that was told to us during the war. Those lies were told to cover the a$$ of one Donald Rumsfeld and a few others. They were NOT told to protect the country. They were told to FOOL us.

I, for one, want to KNOW about that. You, not so much.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

We disagree. And, for a Tea Partier, you sure do TRUST the government a whole lot. I don't suffer from that affliction. I NEVER trust 'em!! That's NEVER!

If they classified stuff for the sole reason of a COVER UP, they they absolutely HAD an agenda. This leak revealed lie after lie that was told to us during the war. Those lies were told to cover the a$$ of one Donald Rumsfeld and a few others. They were NOT told to protect the country. They were told to FOOL us.

I, for one, want to KNOW about that. You, not so much.

excon

Did you even bother looking up comparmentalization and how it relates to classified documents? If you had you would understand the risk a single document can cause. Its really not that difficult to understand so give it a try.

Clearly your political agenda means far more than the lives of those a leaked document can put in danger.

But who cares if people die as long as you can try to use something to further an agenda? Right?

War is hell, people die... always been that way, always will be.

Turns out this time Assange ,sensitive to the charges I've made about the last data dump decided that he was qualified to act as the editor of this batch of documents and did his own redacting prior to their release.
The question then becomes :what other information did he choose to extract from the final copy ?
The bottom line is that it is neither Assange' or PFC Mattingly's call.

But who cares if people die as long as you can try to use something to further an agenda? Right?Hello again, smoothy:

Surprisingly, you got this one just right... Ceptin about the care part. I care if people die. And, you're right about having an agenda. You're just wrong about what it is.

My agenda is to SAVE lives AND my country. Here's how. I believe that, from this day forward, MORE lives will be SAVED than will be lost, IF the TRUTH about the mistakes we made in past wars, is revealed. You? Not so much.

excon

From the great Victor Davis Hanson.

Had the public known in real time from periodic media leaks about operational disasters surrounding the planning for the D-Day landings, intelligence failures at the Bulge or Okinawa, or G.I. treatment of some German and Japanese prisoners, the story of World War II might have been somewhat different. But then, in those paleolithic days FDR and Winston Churchill did not have to be flawless to be perceived as being far better than Adolf Hitler.

WikiLeaks? Selective Morality - Victor Davis Hanson - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/250948/wikileaks-selective-morality-victor-davis-hanson)

Hello again, smoothy:

Surprisingly, you got this one just right... Ceptin about the care part. I care if people die. And, you're right about having an agenda. You're just wrong about what it is.

My agenda is to SAVE lives AND my country. Here's how. I believe that, from this day forward, MORE lives will be SAVED than will be lost, IF the TRUTH about the mistakes we made in past wars, is revealed. You? Not so much.

exconSo... you care about those aiding the terrorists... and don't give a hoot about our troops and those who are helping us... because its THOSE people you (for supporting wiki-leaks criminal violations) are going to get killed... is your political agenda THAT important you want Americans and people helping us killed... Wikileaks isn't helping us, they are VERY anti-American... they are helping Iran and the Terrorists they are supporting.

Personally I find that disgusting and morally reprehensible. Breaking the law and providing Classified documents to the enemy NEVER helps us.

After all, exactly what capaity makes these crimiunals experts in what can and can not be declassified? OH, right... they DON'T have that capacity... OR knowledge.

Personally... I hope they ALL get locked up... See, I read the documents I had to sign... and I also understood WHY the system is the way it is. I take it seriously.

Zero Sympathy here... I hope they get IRS audits every year for the rest of their lives... They wanted to dance... time to pay the piper. They will now have the very people you don't want to upset... ticked off with them.

Personally I find that disgusting and morally reprehensible

In Assange' case it's espionage.In Mattingly's you can add treason to the charge.

From the great Victor Davis Hanson.Hello again, tom:

From the GREAT excon...

You righty's STILL have a problem with the language. These weren't "operational disasters" or "intelligence failures". They were outright LIES! Big difference!

excon

So...you care about those aiding the terrorists...and don't give a hoot about our troopsHello again, smoothy:

I wish you could read better, or maybe had a better grasp of the issues, or maybe weren't so fast to cast aspersions... In fact, it's YOUR agenda that's driving your posts - not your brain.

Over 4,000 AMERICAN men and women have been killed in Iraq. Since we now know the TRUTH about the lead up to the war, and our conduct in it, we're probably not going to do that again. Had the TRUTH been revealed BEFORE we went in, more than 4,000 AMERICAN'S would be alive.

That's what TRUTH does. I don't know what's so hard about that to understand...

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

I wish you could read better, or maybe had a better grasp of the issues, or maybe weren't so fast to cast aspersions... In fact, it's YOUR agenda that's driving your posts - not your brain.

Over 4,000 AMERICAN men and women have been killed in Iraq. Since we now know the TRUTH about the lead up to the war, and our conduct in it, we're probably not going to do that again. Had the truth been revealed BEFORE we went in, more than 4,000 AMERICAN'S would be alive.

That's what TRUTH does. I don't know what's so hard about that to understand....

excon

Really... Gee, my agenda is follow the law and throw the book at people who break it and release classified documents to our enemies... which is exactly what Wiki-leaks is doing... as well as the d1ckless wonders that gave the documents to them.

THere IS no gray area... the Documents were Classified... these COWARDS and terrorist lovers broke the law... I honestly hope they all get life in prison.

After all, if there was nothing in them then why didn't Obama have them declassified... He is the all knowing omnipotient Messiah... its hard to find someone that hates the Military and our Soldiers more than he hates them... It would have been in his interest... or is there something here that's REALLY important you are missing... like because you never read the forms you HAD to sign to get a clearance or even get it renewed. You know its in there along with that thing about being subjected to random drug and urine testing... etc. and yeah... right where it details the penalties and legal action you would be subject to if you violate the terms you signed on to.

YOU aren't in grade of determining what should or shouldn't be declassified. The fact remains it is... and legally that's ALL that matters. Try driving pass a stopped schoolbus at 90 mph without stopping just because you don't think you should have to... see how far that gets you in court.

And it only gets far more touchy at higher levels of clearances and classification levels. But you have a clearance you should know all of that already.

Incidentally... YOU were one of those saying we should not be in Iraq OR Afghanistan... because there are soveriegn nations... you know, Like Germany and Japan were, then exactly WHY do you think we should have done anything when they were torturing Terrorists... or is there Hypocrisy there on your part?

You know its in there along with that thing about being subjected to random drug and urine testing...

YOU aren't in grade of determining what should or shouldn't be declassified. The fact remains it is.....and legally thats ALL that matters.Hello again, smoothy:

Well, it isn't ALL that matters... What matters MORE is the bedrock values of our nation. When our leaders betray them, somebody has to tell.

excon

PS> I was in Vietnam.. They didn't have no stinkin drug tests then..

They were outright LIES! Big difference
The data dump is almost exclusively raw data after action reports . That means some guy using the toggle on the ground to pilot a drone watching a demonstration of Iraqi's supporting the clown who threw a pair of shoes at the President reports that the crowd dispersed peacefully.

Hello again, smoothy:

Well, it isn't ALL that matters... What matters MORE is the bedrock values of our nation. When our leaders betray them, somebody has to tell.

excon

PS> I was in Vietnam.. They didn't have no stinkin drug tests then..

Well, then you don't have a clearance now... they go inactive after a period if not renewed.

I said that because you said you had one NOW... I know what they were doing as long as 25 years ago... up until now but not as far back as the early 70's, but as long as it is current and active you are at LEAST subject to random testing at any time. Be glad you weren't subject to annual Polygraphs.

Sorry, but the law is the law... someones misguided political ideology has no place in it. I hope they throw the book at everyone involved in this breach of National security.

You don't think I never saw something I might not agree with personally? Fact is I did but what I thought had no bearing on it. A job is a job, and the law is the law... there is no exemption saying "unless you believe otherwise."

You don't think I never saw something I might not agree with personally? Fact is I did but what I thought had no bearing on it. A job is a job, and the law is the law........there is no exemption saying "unless you believe otherwise."Hello again, smoothy:

They came first for the Communists,
And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
And by that time no one was left to speak up.

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

excon

Funny how you can quote that and support the Democrat party that hates the Constitution and hates the Bill of Rights that get in their way in the same breath.

The law is the law... how do you think you became an excon? Seriously. Didn't learn anything from that? I mean besides "don't get caught".

The law is the law... classified materials are classified secret or higher for a very good reason (actually Confidentual is where it starts). Except in the Case of Obamas personal records he is afraid the public might see. THAT is one case where they SHOULD be made public... I say we start there.


Just because I think we should stage snipers along the border and shoot anyone sneaking across for sport, sell hunting licenses, you could pay for a fence with the proceeds... doesn't mean we actually can.

Or even Better... Target gang members for execution... put a bounty on their heads... dead or alive. See how that drops inner-city crime. Would cost far less lives of productive Americans or harm fewer people helping AMerica that being a traitor and giving classified documents to our enemies would.

Funny how you can quote that and support the Democrat party that hates the Constitution and hates the Bill of Rights that get in their way in the same breath.Hello again, smoothy:

Every time you LOSE an argument, which is EVERY time, you start spouting slogans, bumper stickers, and talking points. That ain't going to do it.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Every time you LOSE an argument, which is EVERY time, you start spouting slogans, bumper stickers, and talking points. That ain't gonna do it.

excon

Really, you mean just like you do?

The law isn't a talking point... oh it might be for Democrats that don't believe it applies to them. Just to the rest of the "unwashed masses" that get in their Illuminati way who aren't as "enlightened" as they themselves are.

Treason is still treason... and people who commit it should be shot by firing squad. Not called heroes by the left.

This is rich, the leaker that admits he's putting people in danger by his leaks is not happy (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-weller/julian-assange-wikileaks-founder-to-sue-_b_778512.html) that the Swedes leaked rape accusations against him.


More than two and a half months after Swedish authorities leaked rape accusations against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange no charges have been filed and the cyberhacker plans to file a lawsuit against prosecutors.

This is rich, the leaker that admits he's putting people in danger by his leaks is not happy (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-weller/julian-assange-wikileaks-founder-to-sue-_b_778512.html) that the Swedes leaked rape accusations against him.

Poor Baby... welcome to the real world. He thought he was special or something? He should have aligned himself with Obama, the press would have left him alone. And the Norwegions would have given HIM a Nobel prize too.

He's just angry the Swedes won't grant him asylum.

I think the diplomatic leaks yesterday will undermine diplomatic cooperation around the world and instead of preventing wars ,as the Assange clown claims to desire ;will undermine the very process that prevents them.

... is not happy that the Swedes leaked rape accusations against him.He's not happy because he was falsely accused of rape. Wouldn't that make you unhappy as well?

He's not happy because he was falsely accused of rape. Wouldn't that make you unhappy as well?

If that's the case why is there an international warrant against him by the Swedish government related to the rape... a warrant that the Swedish courts have upheld .

From the article:


Questions have been raised about the background of the two women involved and the association of at least one of them with a U.S.-backed right-wing organization
And

Despite the "on-going" investigation, Assange was allowed to leave Sweden. In most Western nations a person under investigation for rape would have his/her passport confiscated and would be ordered to remain available to police.

Hello:

What he does with his wee wee, has NOTHING to do with what he does with his Mac.

excon

And this is a complete diversion from the fact that he should hang from a rope for espionage...
What I want to know is why the US doesn't have a warrant out for him ?

and this is a complete diversion ...Yes it is. Some say the charges are trumped by the US specifically for diversion, and you are playing their hand perfectly.

Why would the Obots do that when they have a real provable case of espionage against him if they want it ?

I think the recent leaks will finally prompt them to act.

Tom I think we should agree that this process is embarrassing everyone and helping no one

Oh I agree . As I read most of the news I see nothing particularly new and many confirmations of stuff I deduced from available open source research . Again Assange is just opening the vault to unvettted raw data that enemies can piece together with their known intel and potentially put operatives at risk.

There is also undiplomatic emails that once released hurts years of diplomatic efforts at cooperation with allies and adversaries alike.

These leaks from the start are the work of espionage ,and conduits like the NY Slimes really stretch credulity claiming it is in the public's best interest to have access to this.

More on the NY Slimes participation.

Back when the Climategate leaked emails were published the Slimes made the following comments when they decided not to publish them:

The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won't be posted here.
Private Climate Conversations on Display - NYTimes.com (http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/private-climate-conversations-on-display/)

But now when there are real national security implications related to the Wikileaks relevations the Slime contradict this principle.

The articles published today and in coming days are based on thousands of United States embassy cables, the daily reports from the field intended for the eyes of senior policy makers in Washington.. . The Times believes that the documents serve an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy in a way that other accounts cannot match.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29editornote.html
In the interest of fairness ,the Slimes should release all internal documents related to how they make their editorial decisions. I want to see all memos ,emails ,the names of all anonymous sources .Oh yeah... their internal processes is private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye.

I think an act of rendition is in order for this scumbag. Its been done before... why don't they do it again.

It appears that this leak/disclosure is doing some GOOD. Whaddya know about that?
No it isn't. The damage this will do to the American diplomatic efforts worldwide will take years to repair.Hello again, tom:

I don't know how this wound up on another thread... Nonetheless, Iran sure doesn't like the disclosure (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/world/middleeast/30iran.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a22). That's good for the world, no?

In my view, the fallout from the leak has not been fully realized yet. The jury is still out.

By the way, in regards to the first leak, we all heard the screeching about blood on his hands... But, to date, there hasn't been ONE death attributed to the first leak... Whadya know about that?

excon

What the leaks show about Iran is what has been known for years. What it shows about the US handling of Iran confirms my worse fears... that the US is well aware of the threat they pose ,and still vascilates in it's response. The major story coming out of this is that the leaks have shown the President and Evita to be unable to protect US secrets or preserve allies from embarrassment.

We are the laughingstock of the world, an impotent superpower whose response to those who aid our enemies is to write a letter asking them not to do it.
Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: Wikileaks Completes Obama's Transformation Into Jimmy Carter (http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/11/wikileaks-completes-obamas.html)
The Asian Times correctly identifies the dangers of these leaks ;that North Korea, Iran and China will either successfully challenge the US because of it's apparent weakness ,or miscalculate.
Should a credible argument be made that he has abandoned an ally such as South Korea, Obama would find it difficult to either avoid responding harshly to Iran or stop Israel from attacking. Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia would likely add their weight to that of the Jewish state, as they were revealed to have done in the past by the WikiLeaks and other reports.

This still outlines only the start of a potential ripple effect. The situation of several other American allies is already so bad that they hardly even need a Korean paradigm to despair. Lebanon's Prime Minister Saad Hariri, for example, just went hat-in-hand to Tehran [4] and started a diatribe against Israel, [5] in an apparent sign that he is ready to toe the Iranian line if that is what it will take to ensure his survival.

In Iraq, the Western-backed Iyad Allawi was elbowed out of forming a government by his Iran-backed Shi'ite rivals despite winning the popular election earlier this year. In Afghanistan, an already-alienated President Hamid Karzai [6] is looking on as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization effort to prop him up continues. [7] However as the counter-insurgence strategy employed by the American-led coalition continues to draw fire, [8] what happened to South Vietnam looms over him in the slightly more distant future. In Yemen, too, the government is getting desperate against al-Qaeda militants and Iran-backed Houtini rebels, and, according to some reports, is considering playing both sides.

All this suggests that the current patient and diplomatic strategy Obama is pursuing does not bode well for American interests in Asia. War, moreover, is unlikely to be a good substitute for a better and clearer vision, and by itself is unlikely to bring anything positive to the region. What is needed from the White House is strong leadership, and if it does not materialize, the effects will likely be disastrous.
Asia Times Online :: Korea News and Korean Business and Economy, Pyongyang News (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LK30Dg01.html)

The nation that looks good is Israel . They have been upfront about the Iranian threat and everything they have said has panned out . They are also the only nation that has taken concrete action against the 12'ers . Iranian nuclear scientists now have to look over their shoulders . There has been 'mysterious 'explosions at their facilities ,and cyber attacks against their systems .
At this point the Israeli's must be wondering who needs to prop up whom?

The major story coming out of this is that the leaks have shown the President and Evita to be unable to protect US secrets or preserve allies from embarassment.Hello tom:

Oh, I understand the right wing's outrage. What I DON'T understand is the right wing's total MISUNDERSTANDING of the Constitution, and the laws of our land... Ok, YES I do. You think the Bill of Rights skipped the First Amendment, and stopped at the Second...

Just what, specifically, could Obama or Evita have DONE to prevent this leak? Send a drone after him? Render him, like smoothy says? Put him in Gitmo?? Those ARE viable options - if that pesky Constitution didn't get in the way.

excon

How is it that Jullian Assange has
1st Amendment protection ? Espionage is espionage and against the law... Treason is also against the law and the Constitution . PFC Mattingly should be facing charges for both under both military tribunal and civilian court.

If we cannot get extradition against Assange I would be in favor of a rendition. Why not ? The Israelis are applauded for using it against Adolf Eichmann .

Hello again, tom:
How is it that Jullian Assange has 1st Amendment protection ?When what he published became available to readers in the United States. The question is quite right wing of you.
Espionage is espionage and against the law .....Treason is also against the law and the Constitution .You want to CHARGE him under our law, yet you don't want to give him the PROTECTION of the law. That's quite right wing of you.
If we cannot get extradition against Assange I would be in favor of a rendition. Why not ? The Israelis are applauded for using it against Adolf Eichmann .That's QUITE right wing of you, and of course, UTTERLY against the right wingers beloved Constitution.

excon

Hello again, tom:When what he published became available to readers in the United States. The question is quite right wing of you.You want to CHARGE him under our law, yet you don't want to give him the PROTECTION of the law. excon

The Espionage Act of 1917 was a United States federal law passed on June 15, 1917, shortly after the U.S. entry into World War I, during the First Red Scare.[1]

It prohibited any attempt to interfere with military operations, support America's enemies during wartime, to promote insubordination in the military, or interfere with military recruitment. In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States that the act did not violate the free speech rights of those convicted under its provisions.
Espionage Act of 1917 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917)

It is not perfect because the law has not been updated for 21st Century realities . But there is a law in place that was definitely violated .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112904326.html

The Espionage Act of 1917 was a United States federal law passed on June 15, 1917, shortly after the U.S. entry into World War I, during the First Red Scare.[1]

It prohibited any attempt to interfere with military operations, support America's enemies during wartime, to promote insubordination in the military, or interfere with military recruitment. In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States that the act did not violate the free speech rights of those convicted under its provisions.
Espionage Act of 1917 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917)

Um.. Tom... EVERYBODY on Earth has U S Constitutional Protections except George Bush, and conservatives... in the eyes of the left.

The Espionage Act of 1917 was a United States federal law passed on June 15, 1917, shortly after the U.S. entry into World War I, during the First Red Scare.Hello again, tom:

There's another way to have done this... Personally, I GUARD my information. I don't belong to Facebook. I pay in cash. I don't tweet. I cleanse my computer regularly. I have a post office box... I do much more than that, but in short, I do EVERYTHING I can to GUARD my data. It's common wisdom, in this internet age, that IF it's on a hard drive, it CAN be stolen. If you're the government, it's a slam dunk that it WILL be STOLEN. It COULD have been encrypted, or sent snail mail. It wasn't. I don't know WHY they didn't do that.

It's yet another intelligence failure. It boggles my mind. It's like the WMD's our intelligence agency's SAID were there, but weren't. I STILL don't know how they did THAT. But, to leave your data vulnerable to theft, and then snivel about it being stolen, is... Well, it's STUPID. I'm reminded of some barn somewhere with its door open.

excon

Yes it is an intel failure of monumental proportions born out of the 9-11 Commission Report and general government incompetence.

One of the big criticisms about the intel agencies was the lack of
Sharing info.between the various intel agencies . To address this problem a decision was made to make the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) the clearing house of secured information .

The problem is that it was also opened up to a multitude of Executive Branch
Personel .

I heard retiring Congress man Peter Hoekstra mention yesterday that up to 500,000 Executive Dept employees have security access
To the system.

Allegedly pfc Mattingly ,given his clearance ,was able to spend a lot of time unsupervised surfing SIPRNET while stationed in Baghdad .These text docs are small and compressible .

The gvt. Announced it will begin limiting access again... that barn door analogy is right on.

Not sure of the reliability of how he downloaded ,but rumor has it he erased a Lady Gaga CD or filled a few flash drives with the hundreds of thousands of docs .

It is still treason and espionage and should be treated as such. Many villians prey on the stupid .

but rumor has it he erased a Lady Gaga CDYou can't erase a commercial CD.


Many villians prey on the stupid .Sounds like the corporations that organized the Tea Party.

Did I say it was commercial ? The soldiers share all types of downloads .It could've been a copy on an erasable CD . I don't know... I heard it as a rumor and did not confirm it.


Edit : in his own words :
“I would come in with music on a CD-RW labeled with something like 'Lady Gaga,' erase the music then write a compressed split file,” he wrote. “No one suspected a thing and, odds are, they never will."
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak

Allegedly pfc Mattingly ,given his clearance ,was able to spend alot of time unsupervised surfing SIPRNET.... It is still treason and espionage and should be treated as such.Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree. Manning is a crook. Assange isn't - certainly no more than the NY Times is. Are you guilty of espionage because you're the FIRST one to publish secret material, but the people who do it after you aren't?? Nahhh. That's not the way it works.

excon

Maybe... I say bring him in ;charge him ,and let the justice system play out. Do I think the Slimes was guilty of similar activities in this, and in cases like the 'Pentagon Papers ' . Yes I do.


But assuming that the Holder Justice Dept is more willing to see Wikileaks as legit journalism ;even Holder has contrasted WikiLeaks with traditional news organisations in that the Slimes contacted the government and cooperated in redactions .

Assange assumes the role of sole editor in determining what the public has a right to know ;regardless of how many lives he puts in danger .

There is also a question of theft of government property . He had a direct hand in the Mattingly activities and at a minimum collaborated, aided and abetted, or conspired in the theft.

regardless of how many lives he puts in danger
How so? What lives are these?


Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell has said previously that there was no evidence that anyone had been killed because of the leaks. Sunday, another Pentagon official told McClatchy that the military still has no evidence that the leaks have led to any deaths.

So someone has to be killed first before the threat is realized ? The truth is that there are many informants on the run in AfPakia over the spring releases .

Do I think the Slimes was guilty of simular activities in this, and in cases like the 'Pentagon Papers ' . Yes I do. Hello again, tom:

Yeah, for authoritarian minds, those who expose secrets are far more hated than those in power who committed the heinous acts that were exposed.

excon

Hello again, tom:

Yeah, for authoritarian minds, those who expose secrets are far more hated than those in power who commit the heinous acts that were exposed.

excon
Greenie for you.

So national security should have no consideration ? I'll believe Jullian Assange is a legit journalist and not simply an enemy of the country when he penetrates the secret communications of AQ and publishes them . In fact... I dare him!

So national security should have no consideration ?Hello again, tom:
I'm all for keeping secret THAT which will HARM my country... In fact, I STILL have my secret clearance, and I have NEVER divulged what I know, nor will I EVER. However, I'm all for exposing THAT which embarrasses those in power.

excon

Ex ,he crossed that line . This isn't about transparency ;it isn't about exposing wrong doing .It's about malice . He doesn't care who he hurts or endangers . It is strictly cyber-warfare targeting the United States . He needs to be treated as the enemy combatant he is.

Ex ,he crossed that line .Hello again, tom:

No he didn't. This is an old discussion between us.. I'm quick to find that someone acted Constitutionally. You're quick to find they didn't. I believe that freedom HAS no line, otherwise it wouldn't be freedom. You? Not so much.

excon

I don't think Russia is going to be as accommodating to Assange as the White House has been.

Moscow's Bid to Blow Up WikiLeaks (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-11-30/moscows-bid-to-blow-up-wikileaks-russians-play-by-different-rules/)

Hello again, tom:

No he didn't. This is an old discussion between us.. I'm quick to find that someone acted Constitutionally. You're quick to find they didn't. I believe that freedom HAS no line, otherwise it wouldn't be freedom. You? Not so much.

excon

Well let's put it this way... if the goal is open government and open internet then Assange's anarchy will have just the opposite effect... not just in the US ,but world wide.

Or to make it personal... why can't he publish your account numbers and passwords ,bank acconts ,tax records, and have constitutional protection to do so ? All he needs is some clown in those intitutions to collect the info for him... obviously he is not an accessory to the violation in your eyes .

Now the damage is obvious... how can diplomats of nations communicate candidly and trust that their conversations will not end up on this dweebs web site ? This has done incalculable damage to international relations .

This has done incalculable damage to international relations .Hello again, tom:

What do Senator Joe Lieberman and the Chinese communists have in common? They BOTH want to tell you what you can and can't read... (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101201/wr_nm/us_wikileaks_amazon_5) Now, I don't know about you, but making us MORE like commie tyrants is doing some "incalculable" damage too.

excon

Good thing they did stop hosting Wikileaks... it saves me the trouble of selling my Kindel and finding a different e-reader .

Good thing they did stop hosting Wikileaks ...it saves me the trouble of selling my Kindel and finding a different e-reader .Hello again, tom:

Just to be clear, you SUPPORT government censorship. Jeez, I thought you tea party folks LOVED the Constitution... Guess not, huh?

excon

Pressuring Amazon to dump Assange is hardly a communist plot.

Pressuring Amazon to dump Assange is hardly a communist plot.Hello again, Steve:

Like Joe Barton apologized to BP for undue government pressure, I apologize to Amazon for the same reason. What? There's a difference??

excon

Hello again, tom:

Just to be clear, you SUPPORT government censorship. Jeez, I thought you tea party folks LOVED the Constitution..... Guess not, huh?

excon

Where national security is concerned... yes indeed . Aren't you the one who says there are no absolutes ? Or do you prefer the anarchy that the likes of Assange brings ? I'm telling you that if your goal is open government then this is exactly the worse course of action to take. We'll be back to the days of secret satchels of correspondents that get destroyed upon reading .

I'm telling you that if your goal is open government then this is exactly the worse course of action to take. We'll be back to the days of secret satchels of correspondants that get destroyed upon reading .Hello again, tom:

Or, we'll be back to the days when the press actually reports what the government does. IF, our media did its job, Assange wouldn't have to. In fact, IF the media DID its job, the leak would have been greeted with a yawn...

Yet, when you look beyond the gossip and titillation, you'll see the leak DID tell us things that our media didn't - stuff I would like to have known. You? Not so much. Just where were THESE stories reported??

(1) the U.S. military formally adopted a policy (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-detainee-abuse-torture-saddam) of turning a blind eye to systematic, pervasive torture and other abuses by Iraqi forces;

(2) the State Department threatened Germany (http://harpers.org/archive/2010/11/hbc-90007831) not to criminally investigate the CIA's kidnapping of one of its citizens who turned out to be completely innocent;

(3) the State Department under Bush and Obama applied continuous pressure on the Spanish Government (http://harpers.org/archive/2010/12/hbc-90007836) to suppress investigations of the CIA's torture of its citizens and the 2003 killing of a Spanish photojournalist when the U.S. military fired on the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad (see The Philadelphia Inquirer's Will Bunch today about this: "The day Barack Obama Lied to me");

(4) the British Government privately promised to shield Bush (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8172243/WikiLeaks-British-government-promised-to-protect-US-interests-at-Chilcot-inquiry.html) officials from embarrassment as part of its Iraq War "investigation";

(5) there were at least 15,000 people killed in Iraq that were previously uncounted (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69L54J20101024);

(6) "American leaders lied, knowingly, to the American public (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-10-25/wikileaks-shows-rumsfeld-and-casey-lied-about-the-iraq-war/), to American troops, and to the world" about the Iraq war as it was prosecuted, a conclusion the Post's own former Baghdad Bureau Chief wrote was proven by the WikiLeaks documents;

(7) the U.S.'s own Ambassador concluded that the July (http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2010/12/01/john-perry/yes-it-was-a-coup/), 2009 removal of the Honduran President was illegal -- a coup -- but the State Department did not want to conclude that and thus ignored it until it was too late to matter;

(8) U.S. and British officials colluded to allow the U.S. to keep cluster bombs on British soil (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/01/wikileaks-cables-cluster-bombs-britain)even though Britain had signed the treaty banning such weapons, and,

(9) Hillary Clinton's State Department ordered diplomats to collect passwords, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un) emails, and biometric data on U.N. and other foreign officials, almost certainly in violation of the Vienna Treaty of 1961.

That's just a sampling.

THIS is what Joe Lieberman and his comrades are desperately trying to suppress, just like the COMMIES do.

excon

**Thanks to Glenn Greenwald for supplying the links and some words.

Like Joe Barton apologized to BP for undue government pressure, I apologize to Amazon for the same reason. What? There's a difference???

Yeah, a Senator's staff making inquiries and asking companies not to host Wikileaks is a bit different than the administration pledging to keep it's “boot on the neck” of a company.

I certainly don't need an anachist rapist working in collusion with the poster person for DADT publishing on a cite that also thinks it's OK to publish a pedofile's guide (information I just found out that if they don't stop immediately I will cancel my account) being the arbiter of information I need to know.

Yeah, a Senator's staff making inquiries and asking companies not to host Wikileaks is a bit different than the administration pledging to keep it's “boot on the neck” of a company.Hello again, Steve:

In your right wing dreams... When the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee calls, it's NOT a request...

But, these are differences without distinctions. As long BP and Amazon are operating within the LAW, you WOULD agree, would you not, that government should NOT apply pressure on them to DO something they don't want to do??

Or, are you going to be one way about it?

excon

But, these are differences without distinctions. As long BP and Amazon are operating within the LAW, you WOULD agree, would you not, that government should NOT apply pressure on them to DO something they don't want to do??


Would've loved to see how long a news or any other company would've survived had they colluded with the Germans in WWII .

Hello again, tom:

Wow. Sounds like you're losing the argument.. Yeah, they're faggots and anarchists, and Amazon is tantamount to a Nazi collaborator. Dude!

excon

As long BP and Amazon are operating within the LAW, you WOULD agree, would you not, that government should NOT apply pressure on them to DO something they don't want to do???

Or, are you gonna be one way about it?

You mean like threatening insurance companies? Dragging industry heads to Waxman to explain the reports they're required to file? Calling on citizens to snitch on their neighbors for speaking their minds?

I'd like to know what Lieberman's office said to them, but I can certainly imagine a sudden drop in business right at Christmas... I shop there regularly and I don't have to you know.

Hello again, tom:

Wow. Sounds like you're losing the argument.. Yeah, they're faggots and anarchists, and Amazon is tantamount to a Nazi collaborator. Dude!

excon

Equating a Senior Senator's inquiries into the association between Wikileaks and Amazon with ChiCom oppression ? Dude !

Assange's aim is clear. Putin has no real concerns because the only reason he is involved at all is because he is collateral damage. I defy Assange to attempt a doc theft from the Kremlin !

Assange wants to make it risky business to diplomatically deal with the US .With treasonous activity by pfc Mattingly and possibly other traitors in the government bureaucracy... along with useful idiots like the Slimes and Amazon ,he is succeeding in his 'lawfare' .

He could not succeed against a repressive regime because ,as Steve pointed out , he'd likely be served a polonium cocktail .

He could not succeed against a repressive regime because ,as Steve pointed out , he'd likely be served a polonium cocktail .Hello again, tom:

Very true. But, instead of celebrating our FREEDOMS, you'd rather we become exactly like that. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqtIafdoH_g) Dude!

excon

Not me .I'm not a Brit... nor have I called for his assassination . I clearly said that I think he broke US law ,and he should be tried in a civilian court... letting the justice system decide his fate.

I triple dare Assange to try that with Russia... if he really has any balls. We all know Obama wants wo slap him on the wrist with a feather duster. He never really showed he has the balls to do it to someone who would actually fight back.

Anyone remember Litvinenko? Assange wouldn't get off so easily.

Assange is close to being arrested in the UK . Scotland Yards is just making sure the paperwork is in order before they make their move.

No doubt he will contest any extradition attempt ,and best guess is that he stayed in the UK because the UK judges have been useful tools in lawfare in the past.

(9) Hillary Clinton's State Department ordered diplomats to collect passwords, emails, and biometric data on U.N. and other foreign officials, almost certainly in violation of the Vienna Treaty of 1961.


Anyone who remembers her time as 1st Lady could've predicted this.
The unfortunate thing is that she didn't come close to doing similar opposition research in 2008. Perhaps we would've been rid of both her and Obama.

Anyone who remembers her time as 1st Lady could've predicted this.
The unfortunate thing is that she didn't come close to doing simular opposition research in 2008. Perhaps we would've been rid of both her and Obama.

Exactly... google Filegate and explain why she wasn't arrested for being in contempt of court. And the files DID turn up in the WH residence where access is tightly controlled at all times and highly restricted.

Wikileaks 2.0 ?


WikiLeaks (http://www.wikileaks.ch/)

Evidently Assange is an arrogant prickly person and doesn't keep friends for long . Many of his past associates have broken from the Wiki leaky family and are setting up a competing site. They claim that Wikileaks is too concentrated on the US and are critical of his targeting democracies and ignoring non-democracies. Maybe they can open a site called jihadi-leaks.

Evidently Assange is an arrogant prickly person and doesn't keep friends for long . Many of his past associates have broken from the Wiki leaky family and are setting up a competing site. They claim that Wikileaks is too concentrated on the US and are critical of his targetting democracies and ignoring non-democracies. Maybe they can open a site called jihadi-leaks.

So you're suggesting the jihadiis use modern communication techniques which we can tap into, I would have though that if they presented anything useful your own security services would have tapped them long a go, such as the whereabouts of OBL, and they would have been included in the leaks.

Tom we both know that if he does the same thing to the Russians he will suddenly disappear and I doubt, like the rest of us, he reads Chinese, so who else has anything interesting to read perhaps the memoirs of Kim Jong Ill.

Yes he has targeted the US but perhaps this is because they are the only game in town. Remember this leak has largely been the product of one source

Remember this leak has largely been the product of one source

I'm not sure of that . There are a lot of malcontent dead enders hanging out in the US bureaucracy collecting paychecks and benefits for nothing .

I don't know why our Congress finds it so hard to balance the budget . A 10-15 % reduction across the board would do the trick.

I'm not sure of that . There are alot of malcontent dead enders hanging out in the US bureaucracy collecting paychecks and benefits for nothing .

I don't know why our Congress finds it so hard to balance the budget . A 10-15 % reduction across the board would do the trick.

So, If I read you correctly, your government leaks like a sieve and your bureaucrats are lazy and on the take?

Do you know what it takes to balance the budget? The first step is to stop spending, that is right outside the present logic, the next is to receive a little
Cut in available funds via taxation and higher interest rates, also outside the present logic, then you have to stop importing and start exporting again.

Now I heard your President was brave enough to propose a salary freeze, sounds like step number one and you might think about stopping the remittances drain, That's a lot of money that isn't spent in the US.

There is more than one wikiworm in this rotten apple.
I don't believe Assange wants to languish in jail . So once picked up I'm sure he'll sing like a canary. Then his whole buisiness model will collapse.

Then his whole buisiness model will collapse.Hello again, tom:

Only to be picked up again by somebody else...

I have no doubt that he'll get busted - maybe rendered away to some dark CIA site.. But, that changes NOTHING about the rightness of his actions. Indeed, the purpose for a free press in our society, is to hold leadership to account. News organizations in democracies, exist solely to ferret out and publish information - most especially information that government would prefer to conceal. ARMING readers with KNOWLEDGE is what it's about, and journalists are motivated to pursue that end. That's not going to stop, nor should it.

We are better served by Assange... We KNOW things now, that we SHOULD know. Maybe, if he'd been around before the run up to the Iraq war, we might NOT have made that blunder... In my view, it's GOOD to know stuff. You think it's better to be ignorant... I don't know why.

excon

Maybe, if he'd been around before the run up to the Iraq war, we might NOT have made that blunder... Hello again, tom:

Yes, I have more to say...

The excuse we use for invading Iraq, is that EVERYBODY thought he had WMD's. Not one person in the whole wide world knew, so it's not our fault, right??

WRONG!

The information WAS available. Was it not? Our press simply FAILED at ferreting it out. They were too busy trumpeting the Iraq war themselves... Julian Assange is NOT that kind of reporter. He's the kind we NEED. I say again, if he'd been around during the run up to the Iraq war, we would NOT have made that mistake...

excon

Lol so every intel agency in the world was lying ;and every world leader was lying... even the ones that opposed the invasion ? And every single press agency was sitting on their thumbs ,not doing due dilligence and were instruments of a government run by a politician they despised ? Is that what you are trying to tell me ? And you are also saying that when Colin Powell went before the UN with his presentation that all the diplomats of the world colluded with him in what evidently was the biggest conspiracy ever ? That when the Clintoons were also warning the world about the threat of the Iraqi WMD program ,all the world was also colluding in this fraud ?

That little ole Jullian Assange collecting cherry picked raw data from misfits ,disgruntled ,disloyal nameless, faceless cogs in the bureaucracy would've done a better job than the collective work of the world wide press ?

Tell you what... when Jullian Assange obtains and publishes the transport manifests of all those trucks in the convoy that left Iraq for Syria before the war began then I'll be impressed with his body of work.
There are very few revelations in his leaks... All he has shown is that diplomats speak more candidly to people in their own agencies than they do in public. Duh .

lol so every intel agency in the world was lying ;and every world leader was lying ....Hello again, tom:

They SAID there were WMD's... In fact, there WEREN'T WMD's. That fact WAS available to the world, at the same time they were saying something else... They were either lying or mistaken. Draw your own conclusions. From MY perspective, it makes no difference.

excon

Hello again, tom:

They SAID there were WMD's... In fact, there WEREN'T WMD's. That fact WAS available to the world, at the same time they were saying something else... They were either lying or mistaken. Draw your own conclusions. From MY perspective, it makes no difference.

excon

Ex you apparently have taken the same view as Bush, it made no differnce to him either. So, it doesn't matter what the truth is, we will just do what ever we like anyway. I think wikileaks has done something valuable, it has proven what we all know, our leaders aren't to be trusted. This presents us with a conundrum, if the Bushs, Clintons and Obamas of this world aren't to be trusted then anarchy is a better system than democracy since democracy produces politicians who aren't to be trusted.

Why does good government depend upon total transparency?Are all secret negotiations wrong? Has he considered the possibility that his actions will make the world a more dangerous place ? Where is the malfeasance in a normal diplomatic exchange,or a blunt honest assessment designed to provide backround at best in developing policy ?
Who is going to confide to an American diplomat or their staff now knowing whatever they say in confidence could end up on the web ?

Forget the effort of the last decade for information sharing between world intel agencies or even interdepartmental cooperation in the war against jihadistan. We are back to flying blind... already the State Dept is decoupling from the network set up to provide common information amongst people with the proper security clearance.

You may be comfortable with Jullian Assange being the sole arbiter of truth,vetting and releasing what he choses based on his world view... but I am not (oh you think he isn't witholding some documents from release ?) . He represents those who want to see the US destroyed . I consider him an enemy combatant.

Why does good government depend upon total transparency?Hello again, tom:

I don't know... Why does the moon rise? Information is GOOD. Ignorance is BAD. WE, as citizens, are better off knowing what our government is doing. You'd rather not know. I haven't a clue why... Maybe sticking your head into the sand is natural for you guys... It isn't for me.

excon

The answer is it doesn't depend on total transparency... There are things withheld from the public for a reason. You say you would not reveal what you know obtained with your security clearance ? Why not if you don't think there are things that revealed would harm our national security ? Why haven't you become another pfc Mattingly ?

The answer is it doesn't depend on total transparency ... Hello again, tom:

The words "total transparency" are yours. I believe in keeping secret THAT which will harm my nation... But, WHEN I've decided what's secret, I'd keep it OUT of the hands of people like PFC Mattingly... I WORK in the security field... Keeping the information OUT of his hands would have been EASY PEASY... But, they didn't guard their data.

excon

I believe in keeping secret THAT which will harm my nation.


I am all in favor of whistle blowing . What these guys did was not whistleblowing... it was an attempt at harming the country . Mixed in with the few things that you think was new is a multitude of things that are very harmful to legitimate diplomacy . The things you find revealing are for the most part old news. Anyone who can read through open source information could piece together the things that have made the headlines.

I'm not a big fan of what Daniel Ellsberg did . But at least in his case ,he leaked a vetted analysed policy paper . He didn't dump thousands of documents willy nilly that when read lack content .


But, WHEN I've decided what's secret, I'd keep it OUT of the hands of people like PFC Mattingly... I WORK in the security field... Keeping the information OUT of his hands would have been EASY PEASY... But, they didn't guard their data.

"Americas Chickens coming home to roost " . What you just told me is that you favor less transparency... not the type of transparency that you have been applauding with these leaks .

What you just told me is that you favor less transparency ....not the type of transparency that you have been applauding with these leaks. Anyone who can read through open source information could piece together the things that have made the headlines.Hello again, tom:

I HATE the word, "transparency", just like I HATE the words, "going forward". Those are PC words that DON'T say anything...

There are things that a nation needs to keep SECRET. Then there are things that a leader keeps SECRET that are simply EMBARRASSING to him. They are NOT the same things. I'm all FOR keeping your lips sealed about one, and I'm all FOR revealing everything about the other.

I suggest the leaks DID reveal new things. Nonetheless, you CONFIRM above, the laziness of our current "lame stream media". As you point out, IF they had done their jobs, they COULD have pieced these stories together and REPORTED them... They DIDN'T. They were too busy attending beltway cocktail parties rubbing elbows with the people they were supposed to be reporting on... That's why Assange did us a service.

excon

It is not the role of the press to dump raw documents into the public domain.That's lazy irresponsible journalism of the highest degree.

Of course ,Assange only being competent in the transfer of raw data can hardly be called a journalist. We do more legitimate journalism in our discussions.

We do more legitimate journalism in our discussions.
Hahhahahahahhahahahahahhahahahah!!

It is not the role of the press to dump raw documents into the public domain.That's lazy irresponsible journalism of the highest degree.
Hello again, tom:

I'm not as hung up about labels as you are.. I don't care IF Assange is a journalist, a rapist, or a hacker. HE is not the point. The point IS the American public. Whomever winds up being the bad guy here, WE, as American citizens are better informed. THAT is what the First Amendment is designed to accomplish, and Wikkileaks fulfilled it perfectly.

excon

Hahhahahahahhahahahahahhahahahah!!!!!!

Well most of us anyway . Above is a comment that is not designed to further the discussion

well most of us anyway . Above is a comment that is not designed to further the discussionThat's your standard response all right.

But Obama is the Messiah... and Assange isn't yet in custody because Obama and his flunky appointees are so incompetent they couldn't find someone in the UK... that probibly has a phone, credit cards and a lot of other stuff in his own name there...

Much less find someone running around in the Tribal areas of Pakistan where not only do the have a typical 7th century mindset like most Muslims have... they actually live like they did in the 7th century for the most part.

Releasing classified documents is a crime... Heck, simply possessing them without actually having a need to know is a crime.

Want to release stuff legally? That's what the Freedom of information act is for...

But Obama is the Messiah.So you keep telling us.

So you keep telling us.

And so an ever decreasing number of you (real liberals) keep treating him.

I have no idea what the heck that means.
BTW I'm not a liberal. I voted conservative last election.

I have no idea what the heck that means.
BTW I'm not a liberal. I voted conservative last election.

You and a LOT of other independents and Democrats that once actually fell for the BS that con-artist spewed 2 years ago. But have wised up since.

Not sure about that but you keep thinking he's some kind of god... weird.

Not sure about that but you keep thinking he's some kind of god...weird.

Antichrist maybe... god? Not a chance and never did.. I knew he was a con artist from the beginning... Its the Dems that did essentually anything he asked... when he asked for it for 2 years.

It cost them BIG in this election as a result. Wasn't the Republicans that built him a MT Olympus in Colorado at the mile high stadium (re,eber from Greek Mythology what Mt Olympus was)... The hard left is who has control of the Democrat party... and Obama is HARD, HARD left.

John F Kennedy is probibly spinning in his grave right now. Today's Democrat party is NOT anything Kennedy would have liked or even supported.

Antichrist maybe... god? Not a chance and never did.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/2623249-post127.html

But Obama is the Messiah
You're the only here that says that, and you say it often.

The hard left is who has control of the Democrat party....and Obama is HARD, HARD left. Hello again, smoothy:

Nope. Missed it again... How can one guy be so consistently wrong??

Obama is a centrist. I'm the left. I'm pissed because he isn't left enough. He promised that there would be a public option. There wasn't... He promised to investigate Bush. He didn't. He promised to release photographs of how we tortured people. He didn't. He promised that he would let the tax cuts for the rich expire. He's not. He promised to close Gitmo. It's still open. He promised to end DADT. He didn't.

THAT'S why the left is pissed at him.

excon

Assange was arrested today for rape . Trumped up ? I don't think so . The guy is a creep . He thinks he knows better than the centuries established diplomatic system recognized by the world. Why wouldn't he think he can defy ultra-liberal Swedish sexual predator laws .

Assange was arrested today for rape . Trumped up ? I don't think so . The guy is a creep . He thinks he knows better than the centuries established diplomatic system recognized by the world. Why wouldn't he think he can defy ultra-liberal Swedish sexual predator laws .Have you ever had sex with a woman without using a condom?

I suppose that is his version of it. The misogynist left of course is quick to blame the rape victim. But the charges of "one count of unlawful coercion, two counts of sexual molestation and one count of rape" appear to be a bit more than sex without a condom . Swedish courts have concluded that there are suffictient reasons to charge him ;but because he is taking on the US ,obviosuly the
Swedes are acting as US stooges. Uh huh

He thinks he knows better than the centuries established diplomatic system recognized by the world. Why wouldn't he think he can defy ultra-liberal Swedish sexual predator laws .Hello again tom:

You invoke the age old corrupt, right wing ideology called transference. He does this, so of course, he'd do that. Mattingly is gay, so of course, he's a crook. Or in HIS case, he's a crook, so of course, he's gay.

I smoke pot. I defy law. That doesn't give me license to sexually abuse people.

excon

Yeah... by his own admission he is much worse than a rapist .
He admits that his releases during the Kenyan elections resulted in 1300 deaths .
He justifies it by saying :
“On the other hand, the Kenyan people had a right to that information and 40,000 children a year die of malaria in Kenya.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/01/julian-assange-wikileaks-afghanistan

This latest batch of releases contained information about vital assets the government believes must be protected from terrorist attack.

Now he is threatening to release what he calls a "poison pill" which would include unredacted names of informants ,native translators in the war zones, and agents inside enemy networks.

He is conducting cyberwarfare and his sites and networks should be treated as such .

Hello again, smoothy:

Nope. Missed it again... How can one guy be so consistently wrong???

Obama is a centrist. I'm the left. I'm pissed because he isn't left enough. He promised that there would be a public option. There wasn't... He promised to investigate Bush. He didn't. He promised to release photographs of how we tortured people. He didn't. He promised that he would let the tax cuts for the rich expire. He's not. He promised to close Gitmo. It's still open. He promised to end DADT. He didn't.

THAT'S why the left is pissed at him.

excon

Obama isn't even in the Center of his own universe... much less Anyone's definition of the Political spectrum... except to someone else with an equally far left opinion.

Incidentally... Assage also proved YOU and the other liberals wrong about the Claims YOU have been making about the WMD in Iraq. THey were in fact proven and they were moved to Syria...

http://www.examiner.com/manhattan-conservative-in-new-york/wikileaks-revelas-there-were-wmd-iraq

Assange was arrested today for rape . Trumped up ? I don't think so . The guy is a creep . He thinks he knows better than the centuries established diplomatic system recognized by the world. Why wouldn't he think he can defy ultra-liberal Swedish sexual predator laws .

Happened to see that happened on one of the Screens in Times Square yesterday... all I thought was Woot! Woot! The wheels are finally turning.

Hello again,

I'm wondering what the wingers, who argued how terrible the strong arm tactics used by the government against BP were, have to say about the strong arm tactics used by the government against Wikkileaks...

excon

Assage also proved YOU and the other liberals wrong about the Claims YOU have been making about the WMD in Iraq. THey were in fact proven and they were moved to Syria... Hello again, smoothy:

Boy oh boy. Still batting 1.000. Always WRONG. I thought he HAD WMD'S. Why wouldn't I think so? Where did I say that I thought otherwise? In fact, there weren't ANY liberals that I know of claiming he had NO WMD'S. But, once they weren't found, liberals, LIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD, began to doubt the stories.

Now on to the article you linked me to. I didn't read ANYTHING about the WMD's being moved to Syria - not a bleeping word. Mee theenks you made that up too! What I DID read was this:

in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city. Now, I don't know know about you, but since this was discovered in 2004, I'd call the cache an INSURGENT cache of weapons instead of Saddam's... But, that's just me.

Excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Boy oh boy. Still batting 1.000. Always WRONG. I thought he HAD WMD'S. Why wouldn't I think so? Where did I say that I thought otherwise? In fact, there weren't ANY liberals that I know of claiming he had NO WMD'S. But, once they weren't found, liberals, LIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD, began to doubt the stories.

Now on to the article you linked me to. I didn't read ANYTHING about the WMD's being moved to Syria - not a bleeping word. Mee theenks you made that up too! What I DID read was this:
Now, I dunno know about you, but since this was discovered in 2004, I'd call the cache an INSURGENT cache of weapons instead of Saddam's.... But, that's just me.

excon
Um... wasn't ANY liberals claiming Iraq had no WMD's.

Selective amnesia we having today... how about all the lefty Lefty Mantra about Bush "Lieing" the last how many YEARS now? THat WAS the left doing it... and were still doing it very recently.

Try and read it again... in that release were documents proving WMD's being transferred to Syria the laft claimed never existed...

THen there was a several Hundred tons of Yellowcake Uranium transferred to Canada from Iraq. But then, the left thinks you can buy that at Costco and Sams Club. But that was released and ignored by the drive by media a while back.

After all... do you believe there was a real conspirocy to Kill JFK? And they didn't get the right guy. After all, that was never proven either...

how about all the lefty Lefty Mantra about Bush "Lieing" the last how many YEARS now? THat WAS the left doing it....and were still doing it very recently..Hello again, smoothy:

Wow. Still wrong. Your dates don't line up... The left, along with the REST OF THE WORLD, didn't start saying Bush lied, until it became clear that there were NO WMD's - NONE.

Now, I don't know if he lied, or if he was mislead. But, in the final analysis, it doesn't matter - the information was NOT TRUE. We invaded a sovereign nation based on BOGUS intelligence. It was a mistake of monumental proportions and it's been a colossal failure. Not only did we lose IRAQ, but that misadventure cost us the very winnable war in Afghanistan too. Plus, the only nation that got STRENGTHENED in this whole sordid affair, is IRAN. Oh, and did I mention that Osama Bin Laden is still alive?

Get your facts together.

excon

I will provide the President's address to the UN prior to the war to prove that WMD was but one of the major reasons for the invasion.
George W. Bush, Address to the U.N.—September 12, 2002 (http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/speeches/09.12.02.html)

Maybe Wikileaks has the information or not. I suspect that Assange has done some 'cherry picking ' of intel himself to satisfy his own preconceived ends.I'm sure within his cache there must be some analysis of Saddam's Airforce Commander General Sada who is very public in his contention that the bulk of Iraqi WMD arsenal was transferred to Syria.How is it that documents detailing when Evita takes a cr@p is released but no analysis of General Sada's contentions ?

But even with Assange's careful vetting ,some information about the Iraqi WMD program was released in the doc dump.As has been stated already , US military intelligence discovered chemical weapons labs,and encountered insurgents who were specialists in the creation of toxins.

The dump reveals that as late as 2008, American troops continued to find WMD in the country.

I will provide the President's address to the UN prior to the war to prove that WMD was but one of the major reasons for the invasion. Hello again, tom:

Yes, but WITHOUT that as a reason, we WOULDN'T have invaded. And, we found NONE. A world wide consensus agrees. Yes, there's a few diehards - people who think removing Saddam was reason enough to invade a sovereign nation that posed NO threat to us whatsoever...

excon

Hello again, tom:

Yes, but WITHOUT that as a reason, we WOULDN'T have invaded. And, we found NONE. A world wide consensus agrees. Yes, there's a few diehards - people who think removing Saddam was reason enough to invade a sovereign nation that posed NO threat to us whatsoever...

excon

We had plenty... a decade worth of cease fire agreement violations.

Hello again, smoothy:

Wow. Still wrong. Your dates don't line up... The left, along with the REST OF THE WORLD, didn't start saying Bush lied, until it became clear that there were NO WMD's - NONE.

Now, I dunno if he lied, or if he was mislead. But, in the final analysis, it doesn't matter - the information was NOT TRUE. We invaded a sovereign nation based on BOGUS intelligence. It was a mistake of monumental proportions and it's been a colossal failure. Not only did we lose IRAQ, but that misadventure cost us the very winnable war in Afghanistan too. Plus, the only nation that got STRENGTHENED in this whole sordid affair, is IRAN. Oh, and did I mention that Osama Bin Laden is still alive?

Get your facts together.

excon

So.. Essentually every liberal in the government... and the world sees EXACTLY the same evidence that Bush saw and came to the same conclusion... and they get a free pass because they DID see the same security briefings? But Bush doesn't because the left just can't stand a man with the balls to say what he thinks and believes... vs liberals who can't decide what color pants to wear without taking a poll...

and they get a free pass because they DID see the exact same security briefings? But Bush doesn't Hello again, smoothy:

THEY didn't send us to war... Bush did. Dude!

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

THEY didn't send us to war.... Bush did. Dude!

excon


Lol I guess a 4 day bombing campaign using 300 combat aircraft flying 650 combat sortes ,and launching 350 Tomahawk missiles from 10 US warships, against military and civilian targets is not war... I guess deploying hundreds of special ops "boots on the ground" as well as deploying thousands of troops on the Kuwait border is not war :rolleyes:

I guess flying 24/7 sortees over Iraq for a decade and engaging both Iraqi Air Force and ground anti-aircraft installations,often destroying them is not war. :confused:

Hello again, smoothy:

THEY didn't send us to war.... Bush did. Dude!

excon
Really Just Like Obama then... He sent a whole bunch of extra troops into Afghanistan where according to your fellow Democrats... nobody was really threatening us.



Come on... thats a VERY weak argument at best... After all, It was Saddam who invaded Kuait... and threatened Saudi Arabia... THATS when the war started. And I saw that entire war up to the Cease fire in ways only a handfull of others have. There was cease fire Saddam was constantly breaking when W was elected to office... You are aware of what a Cease fire is, aren't you?

You know... there is one in Korea too.

If the US makes an extradition attempt on Assange it will be on charges of conspiracy in the theft of US documents and not because of espionage .The reason he fled to England is because the Brits are very slow to extradite in these cases . Sweden however would cooperate because in their view is that theft is not a "political crime".

The way this went down wasn't just a matter of pfc Manning downloading and sending them off to Wikileaks . Manning was recruited by Assange to steal the documents off the US database.

Prior to the thefts there is evidence of communication between Assange and Manning and an overt act in support of the conspiracy before the acts took place. Manning bragged to a pen pal;online hacker Adrian Lamo, about his contact with Assange.In the email Manning revealed that Assange provided special software for the thefts that enabled him to upload the docs. Faster... and also bumped Manning up to the top of the Q ahead of all other Wikileak contributors. . This happened before Manning provided any docs to Assange. Lamo shared this knowledge with authorities.

Manning downloaded a single doc about Iceland first to test Assange .Assange published it proving to Manning that Assange was not a sting operation.
Government documents secret or otherwise is a commodity.The government has property rights .

Assange got wikileaked.

10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden)
Unseen police documents provide the first complete account of the allegations against the WikiLeaks founder

Hello again, Steve:

His conditions of release are to wear an ankle bracelet and steel reinforced condoms..

excon

He is outarged that his records have become part of the public record.

Finally there was an earth shattering leak.. turns out that Michael Moore's book 'Sicko' was banned in Cuba because it painted such a "mythically" favourable picture of Cuba's healthcare system that the authorities feared it could lead to a "popular backlash".

Moore now claims that the State Dept 'made up ' the story . But if they had ,why wouldn't they have made that publicly available ? What would be the purpose of making the claim and then keeping it secret ?

He is outarged that his records have become part of the public record.He is outraged because, like most of the thinking world, it's becoming plainly obvious that the charges are trumped up.

No way... He forced himself on one of the women and tampered with the condom with the other. They both asked him to take an AIDs test and he refused.

No way ... He forced himself on one of the women and tampered with the condom with the other. They both asked him to take an AIDs test and he refused.You were there?


:rolleyes:

I don't need to be there . I am relying on the testimony revealed and the judgement of the very liberal progressive Swedish justice system.

There is no testimony. Where did you get transcripts of a court case when it hasn't gone to court?

Right... not testimony... allegations revealed .

I accept your apology.

Wikileak will probably help condemn the main opposition leader in Malaysia to death.

I don't want to hear anymore that these leaks are not causing severe damage.

The reformist opposition leader ,Anwar Ibrahim, has been accused of having sex with a male political aide. The punishment for this is 20 years to death in Malaysia .

Ibrahim has denied the charge and has called them politically motivated.
But Wikileaks released a stolen document dated to 2008 . In the cable ,a Singapore intelligence official is quoted as saying to an Australian intel official that Ibrahim “did indeed commit the acts for which he is currently indicted” .

The Malaysian press has been quick to pick up the leak and headlined that Singapore's spy agency verified the sodomy .

I don't want to hear anymore that these leaks are not causing severe damage.The leaks are not causing severe damage.

I don't know where you live but in most places you cannot be convicted on hearsay. Look it up.

In the conservative Muslim nation of Malaysia you can.

We really should get a conservative muslim to offer their opinion on this versus someone who hates them.

Assange seems to be angry with everyone now (http://www.news.com.au/features/wikileaks/wikileaks-boss-julian-assange-turns-on-friends-and-foes/story-fn79cf6x-1225974366476). Not a good thing to have an angry man with that kind of information.

I would be too if I were held on trumped up charges and people I don't know were calling for my assassination.

Some dipstick leaking secrets is upset that the someone leaked things about him. Cry me a river, did he expect people to play nice after holding the world hostage? I don't think so, karma's a b*tch as they say.

Some dipstick leaking secrets is upset that the someone leaked things about him. Cry me a river, did he expect people to play nice after holding the world hostage? I don't think so, karma's a b*tch as they say.
Darth Vader: "The hate is strong with this one."

He also falsely claimed that he leaked the Climategate emails. The man is delusional .

There is nothing trumped up about the Stolen Classified Documents...

Wonder how you would feel if he was stealing and selling medical records and credit card numbers that might include YOUR personal information?

And Nobody yet has presented any evidence the Rape charges are trumped up either... other than a scumbag on the run internationally who has committed other high profile crimes claiming otherwise.

I'll bet more than a few rape victims would take serious offense to insinuations that the women making the allegations are lying about it.

After all, I haven't seen anything Assange has said or done yet that wants to make me believe he is anything but a lowlife scumbag.

After all, his actions thus far make John Gotti seem like a legitimate businessman.

I'd like to see Assange steal and post Obamas Colllege Transcripts and Birth Certificate. If he was as good as he claims lets see him pull that one off.

You know the left and misogyny .
While they try to carry the mantle of women's rights they defend the likes of Assange and Roman Polanski... and they remain mum about the abuse of women by jihadistan.

you know the left and misogyny .
While they try to carry the mantle of women's rights they defend the likes of Assange and Roman Polanski ...and they remain mum about the abuse of women by jihadistan.

You forgot defending the cases brought against Bill Clinton as well.

Nobody yet has presented any evidence the Rape charges are trumped up either....Actually there has been no evidence of rape provided at all, just an allegation.
That's the nature of this type of case. The woman had previously agreed to have sex with him and is suggesting that the issue is that he initiated more sex while she was asleep. Which would be a crime under Swedish law, but would not be something where evidence could be collected. Of course you know the charges were brought at an earlier time and dismissed.

Actually there has been no evidence of rape provided at all, just an allegation.
That's the nature of this type of case. The woman had previously agreed to have sex with him and is suggesting that the issue is that he initiated more sex while she was asleep. Which would be a crime under Swedish law, but would not be something where evidence could be collected. Of course you know the charges were brought at an earlier time and dismissed.

We only know WHAT certain elements have wanted us to know about that case... and most of them were friendly to Assange. Obviously there WILL be a lot of evidence that is NOT released to the public by the prosecution... and certainly not before the actual trial. There was clearly enough evidence to not only get an arrest warrant issued, but to go through the trouble to pursue an extradition.

That's a whole lot of trouble to go through for someone "that didn't do anything" as claimed by his supporters.

Sweden isn't exactly known as the land of kangaroo courts... if he was innocent as his supporters claim... that should be easy for him to prove and legally put to rest, IN SWEDEN in the courts there. After all its hard to find a more lefty friendly place than that in the world.

The right to an American style of presumption of innocense doesn't exist in every part of the Western Europe much less the entire world. And he certainly is neither American nor on US territory.

you know the left and misogyny .
While they try to carry the mantle of women's rights they defend the likes of Assange and Roman Polanski ...and they remain mum about the abuse of women by jihadistan.

Hi Tom,

Is the above a dictionary definition of, 'misogyny?'

Yes . There are many examples of this . We just finished an election here where the guy who is Governor-elect of California's staff was caught calling his opponent a 'whore'. Had that been a conservative the lefty's here would've made it a major news story for weeks. Instead it was brushed off as no big thing.

We just finished an election here where the guy who is Governor-elect of California's staff was caught calling his opponent a 'whore'. Had that been a conservative the lefty's here would've made it a major news story for weeks. Instead it was brushed off as no big thing.Hello tom:

Your outrage rings hollow... The left may hate women, but the right hates black people... Not too long ago, the wingers leading talker, Rush Limbaugh sang a tune called "Barrak the Magic Negro". When confronted about this racism, it was brushed off as no big thing...

excon

PS> By the way, I don't care if Assange is a rapist or Manning is gay. What I CARE about is the leak.

Not that I am a Rush defender... But...
.. which came 1st ? Rush's parody song... or this LA Slime Op-ed by black jounalist David Ehernstein ?
Obama the 'Magic Negro' - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,3391015.story)

Hello again, tom:

Here's where you go wrong. It's my understanding that Limbaugh parodied the poem first written by Ehrnstien... To you, that excuses the limp one because he's SECOND, and the FIRST racist was BLACK, for crying out loud. Therefore, the limp dudes second hand racism doesn't count.

But, it does.

excon

Not that I am a Rush defender ...But ....
.. which came 1st ? Rush's parody song ......or this LA Slime Op-ed by black jounalist David Ehernstein ?
Obama the 'Magic Negro' - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,3391015.story)

Hi Tom,

I think the article is suppose to be a parody of your society.

Tut

I think the article is condescending nonsense. The only ones looking for the "magic negro" are liberals. They're constantly looking for ways to assuage their guilt on behalf of the nation, reparations for slavery, war crimes trials for Bush and Cheney, apologizing to the world for America, etc.

I don't need any "magic negro," I've never had an issue with racism.

My god, liberals seem to be such bad people as you describe them!

My god, liberals seem to be such bad people as you describe them!

I didn't describe liberals at all.

Hi Tom,

I think the article is suppose to be a parody of your society.

Tut

Nah .He cites Wikipedia... the uncorruptable source of all knowlege .

I didn't describe liberals at all.

Well there is this just above my last post.

The only ones looking for the "magic negro" are liberals. They're constantly looking for ways to assuage their guilt on behalf of the nation, reparations for slavery, war crimes trials for Bush and Cheney, apologizing to the world for America, etc.

Like I didn't know that.

nah .He cites Wikipedia .....the uncorruptable source of all knowlege .


Hi Tom,
You means like this...

Parody - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parody)

The poor baby Assange has been crying about information about him being leaked out...

Boo Hoo Hoo... look at the pot calling the kettle black.

Hello again,

You know, it wasn't very long ago when we were allowed to go about our business in private, and the government was the one who had to act transparently...

Now, with your full support, that dynamic has reversed itself... The government gets to operate in secret, while the NSA reads our email and intercepts our phone calls... Oh yeah, they're also taking lap tops and cell phones away from people at the border and downloading ALL the data, plus they've enlisted your local cops to aid in the terrorism threat...

Who, amongst you, thinks it will stop there?? ALL of you, I guess.. I don't think it's Going to stop till they can look up our collective a$$ - with your full approval, of course.

Dudes! You're losing the country...

excon

Hey.. want to talk about a full circle... wasn't the democrats of the 60's all about putting down "Big Brother". Now they ARE big brother. You came of age during that era... John F Kennedy would be spinning in his grave with what the Democrat party has become today.

As far as Assange... hey... what goes around comes around. He shouldn't dish it out if he isn't man enough to take it.

Hey..want to talk about a full circle.....wasn't the democrats of the 60's all about putting down "Big Brother". Now they ARE big brother. Hello again, smoothy:

To be accurate, it was George W. Bush who began the illegal spying... But, Obama DIDN'T stop it. I guess losing our Fourth Amendment rights isn't a partisan issue...

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

To be accurate, it was George W. Bush who began the illegal spying... But, Obama DIDN'T stop it. I guess losing our Fourth Amendment rights isn't a partisan issue...

excon

Really, you actually believe that? THAT apparatuse was in place LONG before even George Bush Sr. ever took office... much less W.

Funny how it was fine for Bill Clinton to do it... not to mention FILEGATE... when Hillary didn't even have the legal standing to do it... but the Democrats protected her when she committed Contempt of court.

Really, you actually believe that? THAT apparatuse was in place LONG before even George Bush Sr. ever took office... much less W.

USA PATRIOT Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act)

The USA PATRIOT Act (commonly known as the "Patriot Act") is an Act of the U.S. Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001

Really, you actually believe that? THAT apparatuse was in place LONG before even George Bush Sr. ever took office.Hello again, smoothy:

Of course I believe it. It's TRUE, after all.

On April 7, 2006 AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers' phone calls (http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619), and shunted its customers' internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Of course I believe it. It's TRUE, after all.

On April 7, 2006 AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers' phone calls (http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619), and shunted its customers' internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker.

excon

Really... you have to stop reading the left wing tabloids that pretend to be serious journalism. Because that's been going on for decades BEFORE that. Just because the New York Times or Katie Curic doesn't report it doesn't mean its not happening.

USA PATRIOT Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act)

Really... contrary to what the left wing brain is capable of comprehending... NOTHING new happened under that which wasn't already happening for decades...

Do you really believe the NSA, CIA and a number of other agencies suddenly winked into existence the date that act was signed... incidently... by a majority of DEMOCRATS.

Boy the left is really out of touch with reality. Because I have dealt with that stuff since the early 80's. And it wasn't new then by any rational definition.

I know the national phone and data infrastracture really, really well... its been my livelyhood for 30 years now. I know the equipment... I know the systems... I know its capabilities. And yeah... there are a LOT of different equiment... but they all operate to certain standards that allow them to interface with each other. If you worked in this industry long enough you would understand what I am saying there.

If you are THAT paranoid... then you would know well enough you don't say anything electronically you wouldn't want someone to hear and more than you would in any crowd. Once its out on the internet... you can't take it back. Photos or words. Its cached someplace, by someone.

And know what... I'm not afraid because I haven't said or done anything to be paranoid about.

Hello again, smoothy:

They way it works around here, is since I linked you to MY sources, which you debunk, you get to link me to YOURS, if you have any. Spouting it out of your mouth doesn't cut it...

excon

Really.....contrary to what the left wing brain is capible of comprehending.......NOTHING new happened under that which wasn't already happening for decades.....

Do you really believe the NSA, CIA and a number of other agencies suddenly winked into existance the date that act was signed...incidently...by a majority of DEMOCRATS.

Boy the left is really out of touch with reality. Because I have dealt with that stuff since the early 80's. And it wasn't new then by any rational definition.

I know the national phone and data infrastracture really, really well....its been my livelyhood for 30 years now.

If you are THAT paranoid....then you would know well enough you don't say anything electronically you wouldn't want someone to hear and more than you would in any crowd.

And know what....I'm not affraid because I haven't said or done anything to be paranoid about.
Being a telco man myself for a while I'll wait for you to cite your sources for what you posit.

Do you really believe the NSA, CIA and a number of other agencies suddenly winked into existance the date that act was signed...incidently...by a majority of DEMOCRATS. Hello again, smoothy:

You're missing something here. Consider this a teachable moment... Yes, we had spy agencies before George W. Bush.. They spied on everybody BUT us. It was ILLEGAL for them to spy on us. We have a LAW about that very thing, called FISA. You SAY the government has been violating that law for decades...

That's a great argument in SUPPORT of Wikileaks. Somebody has to reveal the truth, after all. Oh, that's right... You know of somebody who told you the truth... I'm waiting to hear who it is.

excon

Being a telco man myself for a while I'll wait for you to cite your sources for what you posit.

If you in fact are or where (I'll have to take your word on it)... then you would already know that those details could not be posted publicly. You legally can't even disclose account info to third parties about any regular ciruit or customer and there are procedures to verify who you are talking with is in fact who they claim to be before you can reveal any info. They won't even be readily accessible at your office... IE they would be locked in a safe rather than be filed with the other data records. And are not handled the same way even as far as how they are labeled and taged and anyone dealing with them would have a clerance.

If you in fact are or where....then you would already know that those details could not be posted publically. Hello again, smoothy:

I understand.. I really do. You HAVE sources, but if you told who they were, you'd have to kill me..

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

You're missing something here. Consider this a teachable moment... Yes, we had spy agencies before George W. Bush.. They spied on everybody BUT us. It was ILLEGAL for them to spy on us. We have a LAW about that very thing, called FISA. You SAY the government has been violating that law for decades...

That's a great argument in SUPPORT of Wikileaks. Somebody has to reveal the truth, after all. Oh, that's right... You know of somebody who told you the truth... I'm waiting to hear who it is.

excon

Really... then Why isn't Bill Clinton... or Jimmy Carter in jail? They both did it long before W.

Really....then Why isn't Bill Clinton....or Jimmy Carter in jail? They both did it long before W.Hello again, smoothy:

Without sources, this is crapola emanating from your right wing, Glenn Beck addled brain. It certainly isn't to be believed.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Without sources, this is crapola emanating from your right wing, Glenn Beck addled brain. It certainly isn't to be believed.

excon

YOU haven't presented any sources proving this never EVER happened before 9/11 and the Patriot act, because I know for a fact it did. First hand... (and you won't be able to) but then... the Left never follows the same rules they expect everyone else to follow do they?

Hell, Filegate was well publicized, NOT classified and THAT happened before 9/11. But then Republicans aren't entitled to privacy are they? Want to pretend that never happened too?

Here this is public info... its public domain now... related if not specific to what I was saying.

http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/echelon.htm And this predates 9/11 by a LONG time.

If you in fact are or where (I'll have to take your word on it)....then you would already know that those details could not be posted publically. You legally can't even disclose account info to third parties about any regular ciruit or customer and there are procedures to verify who you are talking with is in fact who they claim to be before you can reveal any info. They won't even be readily accessible at your office... IE they would be locked in a safe rather than be filed with the other data records. And are not handled the same way even as far as how they are labled and taged and anyone dealing with them would have a clerance.If that were the case then why a law passed specifically and publicly allowing it? Why publicize what you say has been done in secret for decades?
I realize you enjoy making yourself sound important and full of "secret" information but really anyone with a net connection can do that.

YOU haven't presented any sources proving this never happened before 9/11 Hello again, smoothy:

In my world, you can't prove something didn't happen.

But, it still misses the point... I don't care WHO started illegally spying on me. What I care about, is the GOVERNMENT is ILLEGALLY SPYING on me.

Besides, IF those bastard Democrats were illegally spying on YOU, and you have PROOF, why wouldn't you say something?? You certainly wouldn't conspire with Democrats, would you? Your secret clearance doesn't require you to cover up a crime, does it - especially one committed by Democrats?? No, having one of those myself, I KNOW that it does not.

excon

If that were the case then why a law passed specifically and publicly allowing it? Why publicize what you say has been done in secret for decades?
I realize you enjoy making yourself sound important and full of "secret" information but really anyone with a net connection can do that.

Really... what specifics did I mention? Can't get more general than I did, and doesn't violate any privacy policies and yes I HAVE had training on what can and can't be told and to whom under the curent law.

And check the link I mentioned above in response to excon... nothing very secret about the existence of those programs for 10+ years now, 12 in some cases. NPR even has even aired several programs about them. Not either denying or confirming anything ELSE that wasn't mention in that thread... all of which has links to very public information and investigations.

Anyone can pretend to understand the Telephone infrastructiure... but it takes years... really decades to actually do it. You can't by sitting in any classroom.

Al Gore lied when he claimed to invent the Internet... (he would have had to been 11 at the time). Quite honestly... I can't care less if you believe me or not... you are only deluding yourself if you are that paranoid. I'll sleep just as well tonight if you don't believe a word I said as I would if you believed every one.

I have more important stuff to do with my time than log on here or anyplace else to type stuff I dreamed up. In fact... I really don't have the time to spend as much time here as I do.

Hello again, smoothy:

In my world, you can't prove something didn't happen.

But, it still misses the point... I don't care WHO started illegally spying on me. What I care about, is the GOVERNMENT is ILLEGALLY SPYING on me.

Besides, IF those bastard Democrats were illegally spying on YOU, and you have PROOF, why wouldn't you say something??? You certainly wouldn't conspire with Democrats, would you? Your secret clearance doesn't require you to cover up a crime, does it - especially one committed by Democrats??? No, having one of those myself, I KNOW that it does not.

excon

You do know they could care less about your coversations with your girlfried.. or girlfriends. And you do know (and this has already been on TV shows) they look for keywords.

Now they would be interested in your coversations with Mexican Drug Kingpins... or details of your arms shipments to sudan assumning you had any. But in general... nobody is going to pay notice about what you are saying otherwise. Unless maybe Osama Bin Laden is a distant relative. And No... excon doesn't have an agent assigned to listen to all of his electronic communications.

I don't see crimes being committed. Forigners outside the USA aren't covered by the constitution or the Bill or Rights.

And I do live in a state that allows me to record phone calls with me without telling the other person I'm doing it. And I'm comfortable with that.

You do know they could care less about your coversations with your girlfried..or girlfriends. And you do know (and this has already been on TV shows) they look for keywords. Hello again, smoothy:

So, as long as you say the RIGHT things, and talk to the RIGHT people, you're cool... THAT, to YOU is freedom... DUDE!

excon

Anyone can pretend to understand the Telephone infrastructiure....but it takes years...really decades to actually do it. You can't by sitting in any classroom.Not at all. Kids in their teens were hacking it. It really isn't that hard to understand at all if one is technically minded.


Al Gore lied when he claimed to invent the Internet...(he would have had to been 11 at the time). Is this an example of some of the stuff that you believe? Seriously? You really think that Gore claimed he invented the internet? :rolleyes:

No he didn't invent it, he "created" it.


But it will emerge from my dialogue with the American people. I've traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.

I have an uncle on the other hand, who did help create the arpanet.

Yep, Gore sent funds its way.

Yep, Gore sent funds its way.

I'm just reporting the facts, a direct quote.

I was agreeing with you. :)
On a related note, I did my bit to help the web get a foothold in Canada, I used to *sell* HTML standards to universities and Canadian Forces bases. Of course at the time I didn't really understood what it was all about even though my brother had recently taken me on a little tour of the internet with Archie and Gopher.

Hello again, smoothy:

To be accurate, it was George W. Bush who began the illegal spying... But, Obama DIDN'T stop it. I guess losing our Fourth Amendment rights isn't a partisan issue...

excon

Now MLK is rolling over in his grave. He was illegally spied on with the approval of one of the worse AGs ever... Bobby Kennedy .

Now MLK is rolling over in his grave. He was illegally spied on with the approval of one of the worse AGs ever ......Bobby Kennedy .Hello again, tom:

You are unable to distinguish between an attorney general spying on his enemy, and a nation spying on its citizens... THAT'S why your party is screwed up.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

So, as long as you say the RIGHT things, and talk to the RIGHT people, you're cool... THAT, to YOU is freedom..... DUDE!

exconI know that you understand there are laws against consiracy to commit (fill in the blank) laws...

Where in the constitution or Bill of Rights are rights granted to commit or even plan crimes?

Hello again, tom:

You are unable to distinguish between an attorney general spying on his enemy, and a nation spying on its citizens.... THAT'S why your party is screwed up.

exconSo... the left has granted citizenship to everyone outside our borders? I know Obama and Pelosi thinks we have.

Not at all. Kids in their teens were hacking it. It really isn't that hard to understand at all if one is technically minded.

Is this an example of some of the stuff that you believe? Seriously? You really think that Gore claimed he invented the internet? :rolleyes:Hacking a coinbox in a pay phone isn't hacking the Infrastructure... if you knew anything about how this stuff is set up Teddy Rottencrotch isn't going to be able to log into much of anything from his bedroom even if he did have the login info and passwords... or even understood the cryptic command languages needed, and there are many.

You just proved how little you know about the inner workings of the infrastructure. You watched too many movies if you think you can acess everything from just anyplace.

Hello, again:

Do you remember the story about the town of Bell, California? That's where the mayor, the city counsel, and MOST of the city officials, were RIPPING off the town to the tune of $$ MILLIONS??

How did that corruption get exposed? Should it have been exposed, or should the press have kept the towns secrets?

Turns out, Bell officials were pikers compared to the leaders in Tunisia. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/world/africa/14tunisia.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2)

Wikkileaks did the exposing this time. Should that corruption have been exposed, or should the press have kept the country's secrets?

excon

Assange is going after China now...

Anyone taking bets on how long before something bad happens to him?

We all know Obama doesn't have the stones to do anything... that doesn't allow him to read off a teleprompter anyway.

Hello, again:

Do you remember the story about the town of Bell, California? That's where the mayor, the city counsel, and MOST of the city officials, were RIPPING off the town to the tune of $$ MILLIONS????

How did that corruption get exposed? Should it have been exposed, or should the press have kept the towns secrets?

Turns out, Bell officials were pikers compared to the leaders in Tunisia. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/world/africa/14tunisia.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2)

Wikkileaks did the exposing this time. Should that corruption have been exposed, or should the press have kept the country's secrets?

excon

How about all the Californians that were looking the other way on that allowing it to happen so long? That didn't occur in a vacuum after all.

Anyone taking bets on how long before something bad happens to him?
Matters not. Mirrors are set up all over the place and ready to roll.
It's not the man, it's the idea and you can't kill that.

Matters not. Mirrors are set up all over the place and ready to roll.
It's not the man, it's the idea and you can't kill that.

Doesn't matter... a dead assange... is a rotting dead assange. Wormfood is still wormfood.

And China has a long History of knocking the pedistals out from under people that climb up on them and beat their chest at their expense. This guy is a twirp compared to many of their dissenters.

He shot his wad against the US.. nothing substantial in his revelations . The State Dept as a group are the imbiciles I always thought . Some moron thinks the Mahdi-hatter is the good guy in Tehran.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/01/do-we-have-ahmadinejad-all-wrong/69434/
Now Assange is dangling other bait . The reason he is doing that is a desperate attempt to prevent extradition to Sweden.

That didn't occur in a vacuum after all.Hello again, smoothy:

Ahh, it's the VICTIMS fault, therefore they DESERVE it.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Ahh, it's the VICTIMS fault, therefore they DESERVE it.

excon

That's not what I implied. I am saying there were other people out there than knew about this... and how many of the votors KNEW about the obscene paychecks... wasn't that stuff, public record under the law.

I know in the town where I live... we get an annual report of all that stuff as a homeowner and resident.

I know in the town where I live...we get an annual report of all that stuff as a homeowner and resident.Wait a minute, you think that if they were embezzling money they would put it in your annual report? LOL! You may want to read the story of Enron.

Wait a minute, you think that if they were embezzling money they would put it in your annual report? LOL! You may want to read the story of Enron.

Enron... how about Worldcom? Bernard "Bend over for Bubba" Ebers...


Oh how I'd like to hear about him getting raped in prison... but I'm not holding my breath waiting for it.

Yeah... I lost a lot of money...

US Government Officials Admit That They Lied About Actual Impact Of Wikileaks To Bolster Legal Effort | Techdirt (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110119/14280012733/us-government-officials-admit-that-they-lied-about-actual-impact-wikileaks-to-bolster-legal-effort.shtml)

US Government Officials Admit That They Lied About Actual Impact Of Wikileaks To Bolster Legal Effort | Techdirt (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110119/14280012733/us-government-officials-admit-that-they-lied-about-actual-impact-wikileaks-to-bolster-legal-effort.shtml)

I think you will find there is a separate thread for that one:cool:

Oops. Thanks.:o

Hello again,

So, Wikileaks is reforming the Middle East... That's something, with all the dead people left in our wake, we haven't been able to do...

See what truth does?

excon

So they're behind the revolts in Tunisia and Egypt (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704698004576104112320465414.html)? Or is it the Hezbollah takeover of Lebanon (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/world/middleeast/26lebanon.html?ref=world) he's responsible for?

So they're behind the revolts in Tunisia and Egypt (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704698004576104112320465414.html)H ello again, Steve:

That one.

excon

Remember the "Arab spring" of 2005 ? How'd that work out ?

What good is one person ,one vote ,one time when the result is the tyranny of jihadistan (as Lebanon is demonstrating ),Hamas (in Palestine )or now the Muslim Brotherhood rise in the Maghreb and Egypt ? All the people get are Islamist versions of the jackboots they deposed.

Remember the "Arab spring" of 2005 ? How'd that work out ?Hello again, tom:

Because you MIGHT wind up with another bastard, ISN'T a good enough reason NOT to overthrow the bastard you've got.

If the information released by Wikileaks FOMENTED this revolution, and it DID, then maybe WE could have done the same thing. Only WE could have MANAGED it so that WE get a desired result - instead of having to WATCH from the sidelines HOPING, beyond hope, that the outcome will be good.

Why didn't the gazillion $$$ we're spending with the NSA reveal THAT just a little truth would tip them over?? How did they MISS that?

excon

If the information release by Wikileaks FOMENTED this revolution, and it DID

Ive already show that the self immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi on December 18, and the subsequent street demonstations was the event that led to the toppling of Ben Ali.
How a man setting fire to himself sparked an uprising in Tunisia | Brian Whitaker | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/28/tunisia-ben-ali)

I assure you that no one in Tunisia will tell you a Wiki dump pushed them over the brink. They talk of things they knew well before a US diplomat commented on the caulderon already brewing . You really believe that Wiki told them something they did not know ;that they hadn't lived with all their lives ?
Well here is part of what the cable says :
"Tunisians intensely dislike, even hate, First Lady Leila Trabelsi and her family. In private, regime opponents mock her; even those close to the government express dismay at her reported behavior."

Does that sound like the 1st Lady's antics were news to them? No it doesn't .
But it's a convenient projection to justify Assange's criminal piracy and espionage.

Ive already show that the self immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi on December 18, and the subsequent street demonstations was the event that led to the toppling of Ben AliHello again, tom:

You say X, I say Y. What else is new?

excon

You say yes, I say no
You say stop and I say go, go, go...

I say high, you say low
You say why, and I say I don't know
You say goodbye and I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
Hello, hello

Because you MIGHT wind up with another bastard, ISN'T a good enough reason NOT to overthrow the bastard you've got.

Still waiting for all that freedom in Iran over 30 years after that popular revolt.

Still waiting for all that freedom in Iran over 30 years after that popular revolt.Hello again, tom:

Funny you should mention that... We tied our future to the WRONG dude there. He wasn't very nice to his people, but he served OUR purposes... When the people overthrew him, they remembered WHO put him in power - US.

With minor variations, the same thing is true with the current crop of Arab tyrants... They serve OUR purposes, and we think it's cool.. I guess, their people don't...

That this revolution is happening, ain't news. That we were SURPRISED it's happening, is another intelligence failure of MONUMENTAL proportions.

excon

PS> (edited) Hillary Clinton is speaking as I write this... She's hedging just in case the people win. Nahhh... She's doing MORE than hedging. Maybe IF we had done that 30 years ago in Iran, we wouldn't be facing the enemy we are...

As someone who spent time there the people enjoyed greater freedom under the Shah than they have experienced in the last 30+ years.

I predict the same result for all the nations that choose Islamic theocracy.

The Bush doctrine was premised as offering a 3rd way... but you call it imposition even though the people have more than once went to the polls and voted in secular leadership .

meet the new boss ...same as the old boss

AFP: Tunisian president to get emergency powers (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5juBHIGNP6tw4F6SZgHqEqUv_71IA?docId=CNG.f633c 1f93ead7c4ea82895634cdfeeaf.481)

Tunisians call Mohamed Ghannouchi Mr. Oui Oui because he's always saying yes to Ben Ali.Mohamed Ghannouchi - The New York Times (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/mohamed_ghannouchi/index.html)