# Wikileaks



## CynicalCirno (Nov 29, 2010)

There were enough articles about the subject in many newspapers, and it seems to cause a lot of rage among some countries. Many countries that have been silent have expressed an opinion in letter sent to the american goverment.
How the american goverment's officals think of people wasn't very pretty, and they seemed very likely to ignore many things.
A general image of the world is that everyone is scared of Iran.

What do you think about it?


----------



## LizardKing (Nov 29, 2010)

There's enough dirty laundry to excite an entire convention-full of soiled underwear fetishists.

Which I'm pretty sure exist.


----------



## Jw (Nov 29, 2010)

Political regimes promised transparency in their dealings in the past. 

Refreshing to see that it's actually here for a change. Whether it's good or bad remains to be seen.


----------



## Azure (Nov 29, 2010)

Nothing too groundbreaking was leaked yet, at least, if you actually follow geopolitical power plays as a hobby. And is anybody surprised that Arabs hate Perisans?


----------



## Summercat (Nov 29, 2010)

When it starts being neutral rather than apparently targeted for maximum political damage to an opposing ideology, then I'll like it.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

The problem is, the leaks have detailed information on counter terrorism tactics, operations, who is cooperating with us and who isn't. Every government has confidential documents that talk about their own operations and such. This leak puts American and NATO troops at risk. There is a reason that confindential documents exist. I want to see wikileaks get every major countries military intel/documents and leak all of them too. If they say they are being fair and all where is all the info on all the other NATO nations that are in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Anyways, its how they got a hold of the documents. They were illegally obtained by someone in the military who gave them to wikileaks. That person is now under military arrest. And I hope they are charged with treason.


----------



## ToeClaws (Nov 29, 2010)

The leaks only reveal what the world's already aware of: 1) the US is rather smug, 2) Iran is nuts and scares people.  Oooo, ahh... big reveal. :roll:


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> The problem is, the leaks have detailed information on counter terrorism tactics, operations, who is cooperating with us and who isn't. Every government has confidential documents that talk about their own operations and such. This leak puts American and NATO troops at risk. There is a reason that confindential documents exist. I want to see wikileaks get every major countries military intel/documents and leak all of them too. If they say they are being fair and all where is all the info on all the other NATO nations that are in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> Anyways, its how they got a hold of the documents. They were illegally obtained by someone in the military who gave them to wikileaks. That person is now under military arrest. And I hope they are charged with treason.


 
theyre going to do a leak on russian corruption, supposedly
but since its an english speaking site and the intelligence net was opened post-9/11 so that secret wires could be collected by anyone with basic intelligence clearance it probably attracts more american informants than anyone else


----------



## CynicalCirno (Nov 29, 2010)

Nothing too hauling was revealed, but it doesn't stop us(Everybody beside the USA) from being dissapointed. Our great ally turns out to be hiding secrets, like every country, like my country, but when they finally leak out, they cause the pain. Something worse comes short afterwards a dissapointment. One and a half years ago, politicians all over said that they have limited time to open with a millitary assault on Iran, and how after that limited amount of time they won't be able to do anything. Iran shows a fake card featuring her using nuclear for electricity. That's a bluff - I'm sure more than 10% don't have running electricity there. They will make the warheads at the same time they deliver the electricity. They already started.

I myself am not so afraid. My prime minister may be afraid - but I believe that we can survive anything. We did in the past, we will try to prove it again today.
Wikileaks is run by an european, so the american goverment can't catch him. Pretty much similliar to the US goverment and TPB. It's more than 200,000 files - that's a lot.
About 3000 of them speak about my country, that's not too much out of the total.

It may not be the final impact of the files, but I believe it's not going to end. Europe and the middle east will ask questions - I don't know if the USA will respond.
Obama doesn't seem to clean with his hands as well.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

ToeClaws said:


> The leaks only reveal what the world's already aware of: 1) the US is rather smug, 2) Iran is nuts and scares people.  Oooo, ahh... big reveal. :roll:


 
Seems like everyone forgets that the leaks have detailed information on counter terrorism tactics, operations, who is cooperating with us and who isn't. How is it a good thing for another country to know another countries military operation procedures. Plus add the fact that some of the operations listed in the leaks are clandestine operations. This puts people who are in those countries at huge risk of being exposed.
Its the leaking of confidential files that give fully detailed information about military operations and procedures that is a problem, its a problem that the leaked files give detailed information on what the U.S knows about rouge nations operations (Syria, Yemen...)

Why doesn't every government just spill all of its intelligence files out to the open. How is that a good idea? Its not. And its not good that someone *in our military* committed what I consider treason by illegally accessing and distributing confidential military files. That is not okay in any light. Ever. Endangering troops is never good. Add to the fact that its his own troops he just exposed...

This guy is not a citizen, he is in the U.S military. He is under military law.(Which he broke, major charges have been levied against him) And if he is charged with espionage or treason, the Military has the option to give him the firing squad. He at least should be put in military prison for what he has done.


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

it shouldn't have detailed information in any military form, these are embassy cables from diplomats
the diplomatic assessments aren't that shocking (or at least they probably shouldn't be) to most americans
but the amount of energy invested in finding things like credit card numbers of un heads is pretty bizarre (and illegal)
also that ambassadors and embassies were supposed to play espionage hubs to the point of lifting dna from foreign diplomats is a little worrisome

also assange said they were redacted names, locations, and pulling anything that referred to any individuals or groups that might suppose an actual locus for physical threats
the only thing they left which could be assumed from specific positions were statements from diplomats assessing leaders, members of parliaments, senate, etc. and espionage tactics

but i havent had a chance to go through the leaks myself, i only know what i read in the guardian, huffington, reuters, and the few other news agencies not repeating each other right now

i did like the part where they bribed slovenians into taking a guat prisoner in exchange for a meeting with president obama
also that part where we threatened germany after the cia wrongfully abducted a german citizen

the website is still getting slammed, so i dont know when ill get to read any


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Shartblaster said:


> it shouldn't have detailed information in any military form


 
Really? Uhm dude. Its military intelligence that has been leaked... It has everything to do with the U.S military operations and intelligence gathering. The guy who gave the files to wikileaks downloaded the files from a military computer...

I don't know where you got the idea that military intelligence has nothing to do with the military.


Edit: Taken from wikileaks homepage:
"At 5pm EST Friday 22nd October 2010 WikiLeaks released the *largest  classified military leak in history.* The 391,832 reports ('The Iraq War  Logs'), document the war and occupation in Iraq, from 1st January 2004  to 31st December 2009 (except for the months of May 2004 and March 2009)  as told by soldiers in the United States Army. Each is a 'SIGACT' or  Significant Action in the war.  They detail events as seen and heard by  the US military troops on the  ground in Iraq and are the first real  glimpse into the secret history of  the war that the United States  government has been privy to throughout."

As I have stated, classified military intelligence was leaked. This is what I am talking about.


 On Sunday 28th Novembre 2010, Wikileaks began publishing 251,287 leaked  United States embassy cables, *the largest set of confidential documents  ever to be released into the public domain.* *The documents will give  people around the world an unprecedented insight into the US  Government's foreign activities. *The cables, which date from 1966 to the end of February this year,  contain confidential communications between 274 embassies in countries  throughout the world and the State Department in Washington DC. 15,652  of the cables are classified Secret.


----------



## Grimfang (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Why doesn't every government just spill all of its intelligence files out to the open.



There's quite a lot of material to be worried about, but I really don't see how it's undermining terror operations. And then the US has long been known to support terror groups that represent its own interests anyway, except it isn't shown in a decades-old, declassified document this time. It's relevant to what's going on right now, and how that sabotages efforts of the US' supposedly current "allies". So I mean.. why do people not care about integrity, honesty, honor, or some other word that makes a nice frame for bullshit?

I also have to agree with the argument I've been seeing today. If you're going to argue that only people who "have something to hide" would be against progressively more intrusive invasions of privacy, then you should stand by the argument.

Now, no one has yet revealed Wikileaks' Secretary of State to have given the order to spy on UN officials, in acquiring their credit cards, passwords, frequent flier info, and fuck knows what else.

If Wikileaks is classified as a terror organization, I'll gladly stand by "the terrorists".


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Really? Uhm dude. Its military intelligence that has been leaked... It has everything to do with the U.S military operations and intelligence gathering. The guy who gave the files to wikileaks downloaded the files from a military computer...
> 
> I don't know where you got the idea that military intelligence has nothing to do with the military.


 
the iraqi war files were (from a while back, but were ultimately not assessed as any kind of serious threat by the US military since they were "secret" or lower classification), these are embassy cables
hence "cable gate"


----------



## Felix Andrews (Nov 29, 2010)

Tea-sipping Brit, here. That the Obama administration apparently doesn't hold our current Prime Minister particularly high regard shows how sharp they are. David Cameron is a complete arsehole who's rapidly dismantling what little is still good about the UK in favour of defending private enterprise and the affluent. It's shocking, frankly.
I'm a little surprised that Saudi Arabia seems so willing to bear arms against Iran, but then they and the States have plenty of cordial dealings both over and under the counter, so... perhaps I shouldn't be.
What really gets me is the stuff about the Russians and Italians. Hopefully something will come out of their affairs that'll unseat the frankly corrupt administrations of both nations. They're both in dire need of new blood at the top, really.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Shartblaster said:


> the iraqi war files were (from a while back, but were ultimately not assessed as any kind of serious threat by the US military since they were "secret" or lower classification), these are embassy cables
> hence "cable gate"


 
See my edited post. The files were released a month ago. So its not "a while back" Secondly wikileaks even says that those documents which they have are classified. Classified in that they are not for the publics eyes. You can't get around that fact.

My question is, whats the point of intellegence is everyone knows about it. It defeats the purpose of having intelligence. Secondly you have not addressed the fact that they guy in the U.S military who *illegally* downloaded these files is now charged with some pretty major crimes by the military. If these files aren't a big deal, then why is this guy under investigation?


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> See my edited post. The files were released a month ago. So its not "a while back" Secondly wikileaks even says that those documents which they have are classified. Classified in that they are not for the publics eyes. You can't get around that fact.
> 
> My question is, whats the point of intellegence is everyone knows about it. It defeats the purpose of having intelligence. Secondly you have not addressed the fact that they guy in the U.S military who *illegally* downloaded these files is now charged with some pretty major crimes by the military. If these files aren't a big deal, then why is this guy under investigation?



i dont see anyone saying the guy doesnt deserve to be court-martialed

as for a while back, i assumed we were talking about cablegate since it just happened yesterday but okay
anyways, they redacted names, locations, etc. in both sets of files didnt they (regarding the impact it might have on troops, members of agencies, etc.)

and im fairly sure there were no upcoming or continuing operations plans in iraqi war files, they were mostly files detailing civil rights breaches, casualty counts, and post-operational reports
i think the reports for the ongoing situations were the ones referring to how americans police borders, which is mostly by shooting people
im certain none of that came as a real shocker to iraqis, mostly to civilian americans in that case

i could be wrong but advanced tactics, ongoing operations, and upcoming military operations are probably above "secret" which a fair amount of people in and out of the military have access to


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Shartblaster said:


> i dont see anyone saying the guy doesnt deserve to be court-martialed
> 
> as for a while back, i assumed we were talking about cablegate since it just happened yesterday but okay
> anyways, they redacted names, locations, etc. in both sets of files didnt they


 
Again, why is the guy under military investigation:

Federal officials have arrested an Army intelligence analyst who boasted  of giving classified U.S. combat video and *hundreds of thousands of  classified State Department records* to whistleblower site Wikileaks, PFC Bradley Manning, 22, of Potomac, Maryland, was stationed at Forward  Operating Base Hammer, 40 miles east of Baghdad, where he was arrested  nearly two weeks ago by the Armyâ€™s Criminal Investigation Division. A  family member says heâ€™s being held in custody in Kuwait, and has not  been formally charged.

Army spokesman Gary Tallman was unaware of the investigation but said,  *â€œIf you have a security clearance and wittingly or unwittingly provide  classified info to anyone who doesnâ€™t have security clearance or a need  to know, you have violated security regulations and potentially the  law.â€*

*When Manning told Lamo that he leaked a quarter-million classified  embassy cables,* Lamo contacted the Army, and then met with Army CID  investigators and the FBI at a Starbucks near his house in Carmichael,  California, where he passed the agents a copy of the chat logs. At their  second meeting with Lamo on May 27, FBI agents from the Oakland Field  Office told the hacker that Manning had been arrested the day before in  Iraq by Army CID investigators.
 Lamo has contributed funds to Wikileaks in the past, and says he  agonized over the decision to expose Manning â€” he says heâ€™s frequently  contacted by hackers who want to talk about their adventures, and he has  never considered reporting anyone before. The supposed diplomatic cable  leak, however, made him believe Manningâ€™s actions were genuinely  dangerous to U.S. national security.
 â€œI wouldnâ€™t have done this if lives werenâ€™t in danger,â€ says Lamo,  who discussed the details with Wired.com following Manningâ€™s arrest. â€œHe  was in a war zone and basically trying to vacuum up as much classified  information as he could, and just throwing it up into the air.â€


Manning also released the Cable Gate documents as well. These all came from *one guy who illegally downloaded all of these documents.



Edit: Manning was arrested in May 2010 and detained in military prison for  more than a month without charge. On July 5, 2010, Manning was charged  under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with violations of Article 92 and Article 134,  for "transferring classified data onto his personal computer and adding  unauthorized software to a classified computer system," and  "communicating, transmitting and delivering national defense information  to an unauthorized source". The maximum possible prison sentence for the charges is 52 years.* An Army spokesman stated that an Article 32 hearing, similar to a grand jury, would be held to determine whether or not there was enough evidence to proceed to a court-martial.


----------



## Carenath (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> The problem is, the leaks have detailed information on counter terrorism tactics, operations, who is cooperating with us and who isn't. Every government has confidential documents that talk about their own operations and such. This leak puts American and NATO troops at risk. There is a reason that confindential documents exist. I want to see wikileaks get every major countries military intel/documents and leak all of them too. If they say they are being fair and all where is all the info on all the other NATO nations that are in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> Anyways, its how they got a hold of the documents. They were illegally obtained by someone in the military who gave them to wikileaks. That person is now under military arrest. And I hope they are charged with treason.


 Bless your precious little heart, for such innocence will be destroyed soon enough.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 29, 2010)

As far as I am concerned the less secret shit the government get away with, the better. Sure some genuinely sensitive material may have been leaked here, but maybe if this stuff keeps up the government will calm down a bit in this regard and be more careful about it.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Carenath said:


> Bless your precious little heart, for such innocence will be destroyed soon enough.


 
What exactly are you getting at?

What was done was highly illegal under Military law. It puts a lot of people at risk and may threaten to destabalize foreign policies abroad for the U.S. I have every right to be angry considering I have friends and family serving in the military. This could put their lives in unnecessary danger, just because one guy decided to break the law.



Kommodore said:


> As far as I am concerned the less secret shit  the government get away with, the better. Sure some genuinely sensitive  material may have been leaked here, but maybe if this stuff keeps up the  government will calm down a bit in this regard and be more careful  about it.


 
So please explain the point of an intelligence agency then. And they were careful, how should the military have known that one of their own would break the law and hand out hundreds of thousands of classified documents?


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Again, why is the guy under military investigation:
> 
> Federal officials have arrested an Army intelligence analyst who boasted  of giving classified U.S. combat video and *hundreds of thousands of  classified State Department records* to whistleblower site Wikileaks, PFC Bradley Manning, 22, of Potomac, Maryland, was stationed at Forward  Operating Base Hammer, 40 miles east of Baghdad, where he was arrested  nearly two weeks ago by the Armyâ€™s Criminal Investigation Division. A  family member says heâ€™s being held in custody in Kuwait, and has not  been formally charged.
> 
> ...


 
how is this a response to what i said?


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Shartblaster said:


> how is this a response to what i said?


 



I am showing you that *all* the files came from inside our military. They were illegally downloaded and distributed. PFC Manning broke military law. Maximum senstance is 52 years for this guy in a max security military prison. I hope he gets the max for what he has done. 

Secondly, all the military annalists interviewed have said the same thing I am, this is a huge security leak and can cause major problems for the U.S foreign policies. Add to the fact it puts the soldiers in the field at undue risk.


Everyone here seems to miss the fact that what this guy did is highly illegal.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> So please explain the point of an intelligence agency then. And they were careful, how should the military have known that one of their own would break the law and hand out hundreds of thousands of classified documents?


 Because shit gets leaked from the inside all the time? Its how the Russians got the bomb so fast ffs, this isn't rocket science. 

And I don't really care what the "point" of an intelligence agency is. Their existence is not an excuse to "do whatever the fuck" they want because they have sekrits and screw you you are not important enough to know what your government is doing. The existence of wikileaks and organizations like it gives some incentive, however small, for these intel agencies to be a little less evil.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Kommodore said:


> Because shit gets leaked from the inside all the time? Its how the Russians got the bomb so fast ffs, this isn't rocket science.


 
Wrong, The Russians had infiltrated Project Manhattan from the very beginning. Nothing was leaked by American Citizens. Some of the head scientists in charge of the program were agents for the USSR.


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I am showing you that *all* the files came from inside our military. They were illegally downloaded and distributed. PFC Manning broke military law. Maximum senstance is 52 years for this guy in a max security military prison. I hope he gets the max for what he has done.
> 
> Secondly, all the military annalists interviewed have said the same thing I am, this is a huge security leak and can cause major problems for the U.S foreign policies. Add to the fact it puts the soldiers in the field at undue risk.
> 
> ...



i dont think anyone is missing that ruhk, i think your bizzonkers perspective of the world around you is making you think we all think what he did wasnt
maybe i just dont know any better, how are embassy cables part of the military? the reason he's being investigated by the military is that he's a member of the military
they're intelligence material, but the reason he had access to them is that intelligence files were shared post-9/11 to all branches so that there were be no bureaucratic hangups in investigations


----------



## Grimfang (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Wrong, The Russians had infiltrated Project Manhattan from the very beginning. Nothing was leaked by American Citizens. Some of the head scientists in charge of the program were agents for the USSR.


 
That still doesn't mean that an institution should be permitted to act however criminally it wants due to the fact that it exists. There are a lot of cables that show indefensible actions on the US' part.

Accountability and any reasonable limit to an institution's reach should not be dismissed, simply because of "national security concerns."


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Grimfang said:


> That still doesn't mean that an institution should be permitted to act however criminally it wants due to the fact that it exists. There are a lot of cables that show indefensible actions on the US' part.
> 
> Accountability and any reasonable limit to an institution's reach should not be dismissed, simply because of "national security concerns."


 
So let him take the documents to the feds, or to his higher ups, (oh wait what he was doing was illegal...) why release them to the entire fucking world. As I stated it puts a lot of people and operations at risk. Its illegal what was done, how many times does that need to be said. How is it a good thing when the law was broken?

Second. Military and intelligence agencies have different rules than regular citizens do. This is why there is a civilian court and military court system. They are 2 separate entities.
My question is, do you not care that this puts thousands of peoples lives in undue danger because of one mans actions?

Edit:
So you think the CIA should divulge in all of its intelligence just because its being withheld from the public?


Shartblaster said:


> i dont think anyone is missing that ruhk, i  think your bizzonkers perspective of the world around you is making you  think we all think what he did wasnt
> maybe i just dont know any better, *how are embassy cables part of the military? *the reason he's being investigated by the military is that he's a member of the military
> they're  intelligence material, but the reason he had access to them is that  intelligence files were shared post-9/11 to all branches so that there  were be no bureaucratic hangups in investigations


 
Because they have to do with intelligence on other countries, Because it has to do with/involve *our military*.* And again PFC Manning hacked into these files. He didn't have free access to them.* Its illegal what he did. Can't get around that. Sounds like your trying to justify someones illegal activity...


----------



## jeff (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> because they have to do with intelligence on other countries, Because it has to do with/involve *our military*.* And again PFC Manning hacked into these files. He didn't have free access to them.* Its illegal what he did. Can't get around that. Sounds like your trying to justify someones illegal activity...


 
"Manning was alleged to have told Lamo that he had found "incredible,  awful things that belonged in the public domain and not on some server  stored in a dark room in Washington, DC". He was also said to have  boasted that he had used blank CDs to download classified information  while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga.
Manning's clearance  would have given him access to the Secret internet Protocol Router  Network used by US military personnel, civilian employees and private  contractors."

he didnt hack them, but he wasn't cleared to release them (obviously)
there was a big thing about this, there was a great gnashing of teeth concerning how Manning could have gotten away with downloading the files to fake Lady Gaga CDs

i am??????? wow i guess thats why i rushed to his support in ot being g dcorutrbmartialsered


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> So let him take the documents to the feds, or to his higher ups, (oh wait what he was doing was illegal...) why release them to the entire fucking world. As I stated it puts a lot of people and operations at risk. Its illegal what was done, how many times does that need to be said. How is it a good thing when the law was broken?


 
Because when you give them to the feds, they either do not do anything at all or have SEKRIT TRIALS where some guys lose their jobs and things go back to the way they were. This way, everyone gets to see the kind of shit these agencies pull and it can't be swept under the rug. This is the only way there is even a chance to put some accountability on the agencies. 

And as far as the Russian thing is concerned, I don't see what being a "citizen" has to do with it. People have individual interests independent of national identity, that the Manhattan project was compromised from the begging still in my mind constitutes a leak from the "inside" as those involved were there from the very beginning. The point is, you can never be sure of someone's intentions.


----------



## Grimfang (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> So let him take the documents to the feds, or to his higher ups, (oh wait what he was doing was illegal...) why release them to the entire fucking world. As I stated it puts a lot of people and operations at risk. Its illegal what was done, how many times does that need to be said. How is it a good thing when the law was broken?
> 
> Second. Military and intelligence agencies have different rules than regular citizens do. This is why there is a civilian court and military court system. They are 2 separate entities.
> My question is, do you not care that this puts thousands of peoples lives in undue danger because of one mans actions?



I'm not sure why you're explaining the difference between a military and civilian court system, but if you read my first post, you'd understand my general sentiment. And if your aim is to tackle corruption, taking it to a higher-up in this situation would result in absolutely nothing. That's because people are willing to sacrifice huge portions of their reasoning and logic, in order to support the way things are, and to prevent "bad things" from occurring.

The US, like anything else in the world, is running legal and extralegal operations. It has committed acts of terrorism, and it supports terror organizations while they support US interests (or are detrimental to competitive/enemy interests). The thing is, the US has a defense budget that dwarfs multiple world powers, combined. The US owns about half of the world's worth of "defense spending".

Now, given what I just said, why in the hell should I have an ounce of sympathy or understanding for that? I think there's a little bit of re-balancing and accountability needed.

The US puts lives in danger from its own actions. How is revealing corruption bad?
Do you honestly believe that corruption should remain unscathed, because it results in "more bad things"?

I mean.. the founding of America resulted in a lot of people dying. I think most Americans are glad they have their own country nowadays though.


----------



## Carenath (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> What exactly are you getting at?
> 
> ...It puts a lot of people at risk and *may threaten to destabalize foreign policies abroad for the U.S*.
> 
> I have every right to be angry considering I have friends and family serving in the military. This could put their lives in unnecessary danger, just because one guy decided to break the law.


I'm pointing out your unrelenting naÃ¯vety in this whole situation. You believe what your government tells you, with undying loyalty and trust, to the point where you ignore the crimes your own government commits on foreign soil.
While I *do not* condone leaking of information that 'puts lives at risk' the real question you should be asking, is why are their lives being put at risk in the first place?

In other words, it may be contrary to US vested interests abroad, well tough cookies, the world is *not* America's oyster.

You should be angry at the leaders that put your friends and family in harms way first and foremost.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Kommodore said:


> Because when you give them to the feds, they either do not do anything at all or have SEKRIT TRIALS where some guys lose their jobs and things go back to the way they were. This way, everyone gets to see the kind of shit these agencies pull and it can't be swept under the rug. This is the only way there is even a chance to put some accountability on the agencies.
> 
> And as far as the Russian thing is concerned, I don't see what being a "citizen" has to do with it. People have individual interests independent of national identity, that the Manhattan project was compromised from the begging still in my mind constitutes a leak from the "inside" as those involved were there from the very beginning. The point is, you can never be sure of someone's intentions.


 
â€œIf you had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day 7  days a week for 8+ months, what would you do?â€PFC Manning


If you have a security clearance and wittingly or unwittingly provide  classified info to anyone who doesnâ€™t have security clearance or a need  to know, you have violated security regulations and potentially the  law.â€  Army spokesman Gary Tallman

My question here is, why do people think that he did a good thing. He  just fucked up who knows how many foreign policy operations/ military operations (by putting soldiers at undue risk, pissed off a  great deal of other governments. All because he was bored. You cannot get around the fact that he broke the law. No matter how much of a spin you put on this, what was done was an illegal activity. Wikileaks needs to be charged and the founder put in jail for being an accomplice to an illegal activity.

To me it sounds like you just want to know all the things your government is doing and you don't care about the consequences of it being publically released. What right do you have to know what the government knows about whats going on inside lets say Syria or Yemen. Why should the government tell you exactly what covert ops are going on inside those countries. Wouldn't that jeopardize their lives and their mission?

If you have been watching or reading the news on all of this, you will see every anilist has said the same thing. There is a huge potential for major damage to be done because of these classified documents being released.

Also to me it sounds like you don't like the fact that the military and intelligence communities have different laws. Seems to me you don't like the fact they they are not under the same laws you are. (I assume you live in the U.S)
And with the Manhattan Project, The scientists who were really working with the USSR were 100% Russian...I am not even sure they were actually citizens of the U.S. In fact I am fairly certain they were not.




Carenath said:


> I'm pointing out your unrelenting naÃ¯vety in  this whole situation. You believe what your government tells you, with  undying loyalty and trust, to the point where you ignore the crimes your  own government commits on foreign soil.
> While I *do not*  condone leaking of information that 'puts lives at risk' the real  question you should be asking, is why are their lives being put at risk  in the first place?
> 
> In other words, it may be contrary to US vested interests abroad, well tough cookies, the world is *not* America's oyster.
> ...


 

What right do you have to know what the government knows about whats  going on inside lets say Syria or Yemen. Why should the government tell  you exactly what covert ops are going on inside those countries.  Wouldn't that jeopardize their lives and their mission?

My point is, what rights does the public have to know about secret and classified information that has to do with the military or intelligence gathering. None what so ever.



Edit: Watching the news right now. The founder of wikileaks is now in hiding...Wonder why that is, I can't imagine why...




Carenath said:


> In other words, it may be contrary to US vested interests abroad, well tough cookies, the world is *not* America's oyster.



Never said that the world is America's. I would love to see the rest of the world stand up and police itself and take care of itself. Problem is, no one is willing to step up. The world bitches that the U.S is "policing" the world, and then the world bitches that we don't help/"police" the world. Its a no win situation.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> You cannot get around the fact that he broke the law.


 
I don't care. You keep on using the word "illegal" and make the assumption that means anything to me--it doesn't. If people are being put at risk and foreign relations have been strained it is because the US Government has been up to no good. If the US Gov. didn't do anything to piss off foreign governments in its secret activities, then this leak would not strain foreign relations. But you say it will, so that tells me the US has been doing things it shouldn't if it values relations with other countries. It is one thing to act against an enemy nation and try to keep things secret, but it is another thing to act against an "ally" (in the many ways you can do that, like spying and whatnot) and keep that hidden from them. 

But this is besides the point. The bottom line is that these intel agencies need more transparency, and the only way that is going to happen is if shit gets leaked.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Kommodore said:


> I don't care.


 
Exactly, you don't give a damn when the law is broken if it pleases you.
You have no right to know what the intelligence agencies know. Ever heard of the need to know basis? You don't need to know what covert operations are going on right now. You don't need to know where CIA operatives are in deep cover. You don't even have the right to know. Military/Intelligence is outside of the civilian world.


My whole point is, the law was broken. Pretty severely too (Manning may get 52 years in a military prison for what he has done) What is done is done. But its going to cause a shitload of problems now. You act like you know better than these agencies do.


----------



## Carenath (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> What right do you have to know what the government knows about whats  going on inside lets say Syria or Yemen. Why should the government tell  you exactly what covert ops are going on inside those countries.  Wouldn't that jeopardize their lives and their mission?
> 
> Edit: Watching the news right now. The founder of wikileaks is now in hiding...Wonder why that is, I can't imagine why...
> 
> Never said that the world is America's. I would love to see the rest of the world stand up and police itself and take care of itself. Problem is, no one is willing to step up. The world bitches that the U.S is "policing" the world, and then the world bitches that we don't help/"police" the world. Its a no win situation.


What right does the government have, to interfere with the affairs of a soverign nation state? US Law doesn't apply outside US borders, but like to believe it does.

The founder of Wikileaks is probably in hiding over what happened Jon Johansen and Dmitry Sklyarov, wrongful abduction/arrest.

You implied it. The rest of the world, polices itself just fine.. but when foreign countries do things that run contrary to US (corporate) interests.. that's a whole different story.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> My whole point is, the law was broken. Pretty severely too (Manning may get 52 years in a military prison for what he has done) What is done is done. But its going to cause a shitload of problems now. You act like you know better than these agencies do.


 And you know what.. those same agencies broke the law too, you conveniently ignore that fact. Why are you not berating them for, among other things, abducting a German citizen from his home country, and then pressuring German Authorities against enforcing their own laws. Double Standards much?


----------



## Grimfang (Nov 29, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> You cannot get around the fact that he broke the law. No matter how much of a spin you put on this, what was done was an illegal activity. Wikileaks needs to be charged and the founder put in jail for being an accomplice to an illegal activity.



Why is it dismissible when the US breaks laws?

No one here is saying that Manning is innocent of crimes under the appropriate legal system. Or at least I didn't see anyone saying that. Just because there is a law against something, it doesn't mean it's bad in a basic sense of morality.



> To me it sounds like you just want to know all the things your government is doing and you don't care about the consequences of it being publically released. What right do you have to know what the government knows about whats going on inside lets say Syria or Yemen. Why should the government tell you exactly what covert ops are going on inside those countries. Wouldn't that jeopardize their lives and their mission?



Why should a government _not_ answer to its citizens? Your reasoning here seems to imply that the US government has the right to wage illegal wars, or commit war crimes. While it can do those things, it's not going to be able to do so without due scrutiny and subversion.



> If you have been watching or reading the news on all of this, you will see every anilist has said the same thing. There is a huge potential for major damage to be done because of these classified documents being released.



Why aren't you questioning the things that could have been damaged?

It's a hysterical defense to repeatedly insist that lives are in danger, or counter-terror efforts are being compromised, while ignoring anything that could hold precedence over The Will of the United States. Lives are always in danger, and these wars aren't saving the lives lost as a result of the wars. I'd much rather know what's happening than to stick my head in the sand.

Maybe if the US stops funding terrorists today, there will be that many fewer in 20 years from now. US citizens, as well as the rest of the world, should have the right to know if the US is running illegal or covert operations outside of its own territory (aka: Not America).

But anyway, there's a:

30% chance you'll reply to my response with an article (with emboldened sentences),
30% that you'll tell me once again that what occurred was not legal (therefore making Wikileaks and/or Manning in the wrong),
30% you simply won't reply,
or a 10% chance that these percentages will result in you mixing things up.

So.. I'm going to retire my input from this thread.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 29, 2010)

Carenath said:


> What right does the government have, to interfere with the affairs of a soverign nation state? US Law doesn't apply outside US borders, but like to believe it does.
> 
> The founder of Wikileaks is probably in hiding over what happened Jon Johansen and Dmitry Sklyarov, wrongful abduction/arrest.
> 
> ...


 
Why is the CIA involved in Anti-drug wars in Mexico and South America? Why is the U.S hunting for international terrorists in Syria, Yemen, Pakistan and Indonesia? Why is the U.S sending peacekeeping forces to Haiti and African countries? Why is the U.S one of the biggest contributors to international aid? It affects the U.S and more importantly the U.S is trying to keep an area stable. Maybe the U.S should just stop help fight the massive drug cartels in Central and South America, maybe the U.S should stop all of its international aid. Perhaps the U.S should give the world its middle finger and say fuck you and watch the world fall into a complete mess because the U,.S won't help the world anymore. Maybe the entire world should just stop helping each other and only worry about their own country. (oh wait the EU just bailed out the entire country of Ireland giving it $110 Billion)

You don't live in this country so I expect that you don't understand what was done was extremely harmful.

 I never said the world can police itself. I stated otherwise, that no one else wants to step up. I am all for the rest of the world growing some balls and doing the work that needs to be done. So far the rest of the world seems comfortable to let the U.S shoulder almost completely that entire responsibility, and then bitches about it.


----------



## ArielMT (Nov 29, 2010)

Note to world leaders and everyone working for one: Don't ever put anything in a memo or any other document that you can't afford to have leaked.



Summercat said:


> When it starts being neutral rather than apparently targeted for maximum political damage to an opposing ideology, then I'll like it.


 
I'm not aware that such a possibility has ever existed in this world.


----------



## Torrijos-sama (Nov 29, 2010)

The Truth should never be illegal.

As Ben Franklin said, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."


----------



## Ikrit (Nov 29, 2010)

you know what i hate? people making stuff up because they hate being wrong


----------



## Kawaburd (Nov 29, 2010)

Eeeeyea, nothing of much concern in there that I know of... yet.  only a tiny fraction of the stuff's been leaked to the public so far, but what little has been said isn't exactly jaw-dropping.  It just goes to show drama llamas run amok on ALL levels of civilization.  Really not much that isn't just assumed dirty laundry made public, though.  Putin/Medvedev have the same ultimate purpose as the American 2-party system, European neo-con leaders are colossal idiots (Come on! We knew this practically the day Berlusconi was elected!), the Saudis are scared turbanless of Iran.

Yemen taking the blame for our drone bombers and China wanting to basically gift North Korea to Seoul were the only things in there even remotely curve-ball (well, ok, the NK thing was a shock to me).  Most of this other crap we already knew.  I know the explicit goal of this is transparency but ya gotten wonder if Assange and his crew are basically just trolling world leaders for the lulz at this rate.


----------



## Squeak (Nov 29, 2010)

Nothing hugely earthshaking so far, just some embarrassment for a few diplomats and confirmation of some things than lots of people already suspected. Still, always nice to see state secrets getting flung out in the open. Nice work wikileaks.


----------



## Azure (Nov 29, 2010)

I'm glad this shit has been leaked to be honest(and I'm actually part of the intel community), because the shit those faggots do behind closed doors that garners all this ill will towards our efforts make my job way fucking harder. I hate working with dicks and unprofessional people, and damn near everyone involved in it fits those descriptors.


----------



## Mayfurr (Nov 30, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> My question here is, why do people think that he did a good thing. He  just fucked up who knows how many foreign policy operations/ military operations (by putting soldiers at undue risk, pissed off a  great deal of other governments.



You mean, operations like US officials being instructed to spy on the UN leadership?



> A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clinton's name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.
> 
> It called for detailed biometric information "on key UN officials, to include undersecretaries, heads of specialised agencies and their chief advisers, top SYG [secretary general] aides, heads of peace operations and political field missions, including force commanders" as well as intelligence on Ban's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat". A parallel intelligence directive sent to diplomats in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi said biometric data included DNA, fingerprints and iris scans.
> 
> ...



Let me guess - you believe this is a _good_ thing for the US to do? I bet you that if it was China instead of your own country pulling this kind of stunt you'd be screaming blue bloody murder - as well praising the leaker as "a brave patriot". But because it's _your_ country caught with its finger in the pie it's all "betrayal" and "treason"...


----------



## Lobar (Nov 30, 2010)

Since when does a conservative care about the law for the law's sake?

Oh whoops, my brain slipped into a pre-80's time warp there for a second!


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Nov 30, 2010)

Mayfurr said:


> You mean, operations like US officials being instructed to spy on the UN leadership?
> 
> Let me guess - you believe this is a _good_ thing for the US to do? I bet you that if it was China instead of your own country pulling this kind of stunt you'd be screaming blue bloody murder - as well praising the leaker as "a brave patriot". But because it's _your_ country caught with its finger in the pie it's all "betrayal" and "treason"...


 
Keep in mind, Rukh's pretty squarely a conservative christian fundamentalist. A lot of them literally believe in "American Exceptionalism", which is basically America and/or Capitalism are ordained by God, and that by extension anything America and/or Capitalism does is always right because of it, regardless of what is actually going on.

Yeah, it doesn't make sense to anyone not a fundie, either.


----------



## Azure (Nov 30, 2010)

Lobar said:


> Since when does a conservative care about the law for the law's sake?
> 
> Oh whoops, my brain slipped into a pre-80's time warp there for a second!


I never could figure out why we didn't string up The Gipper for all that Iran Contra bullshit. If only wikileaks had been around in the 80's, maybe America wouldn't be so full of shit these days, GB1 would have never happened, thus eliminating the possibility of Dubya ever getting into office and RUINING EVERYTHING.


----------



## WarMocK (Nov 30, 2010)

Gotta get me more popcorn, the show's damn entertaining.
I can't wait for the next release which will target the big banks.


----------



## Folflet (Nov 30, 2010)

I love wiki leaks, I read it when the internet goes out (which happens alot). I have their site backed up with automatic updates on a 2TB hard drive. I also have Wikipedia on that harddrive, compressed.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 30, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> Keep in mind, Rukh's pretty squarely a conservative christian fundamentalist. A lot of them literally believe in "American Exceptionalism", which is basically America and/or Capitalism are ordained by God, and that by extension anything America and/or Capitalism does is always right because of it, regardless of what is actually going on.
> 
> Yeah, it doesn't make sense to anyone not a fundie, either.


 
You know what, First off mojo. Stop assuming things, stop putting words in my mouth. I have said nothing of what you are saying. And frankly I am sick and tired of your shit.



Mayfurr said:


> You mean, operations like  US  officials being instructed to spy on the UN leadership?
> 
> 
> 
> Let  me guess - you believe this is a _good_ thing for the US to do? I  bet you that if it was China instead of your own country pulling this  kind of stunt you'd be screaming blue bloody murder - as well praising  the leaker as "a brave patriot". But because it's _your_ country  caught with its finger in the pie it's all "betrayal" and  "treason"...


 
I will never said everything the U.S has done is a good thing, Don't put words in my mouth. And I am not claiming that everything that has been done was for a good reason. But the way this information has been handled (Downloading military and state secret documents), was not good. Two wrongs don't make a right so to speak.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Nov 30, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> You know what, First off mojo. Stop assuming things, stop putting words in my mouth. I have said nothing of what you are saying. And frankly I am sick and tired of your shit.
> 
> I will never said everything the U.S has done is a good thing, Don't put words in my mouth. And I am not claiming that everything that has been done was for a good reason. But the way this information has been handled (Downloading military and state secret documents), was not good. Two wrongs don't make a right so to speak.


 
I never said you said those things. I said you were part of a group, and that a certain subset of said group held certain beliefs, and then defined said belief. Anything aside from that is stuff you assumed. And I also don't appreciate the insult, please try to remain civil.

But the problem here is that "Illegal" does not neccisarily mean "Unethical" or "Immoral". There is such a thing as unjust laws, Rukh. And ones that prevent people from reporting corruption so it can be dealt with (either by making the reporting or acquisition of said data illegal) are arguably bad laws.


----------



## Mayonnaise (Nov 30, 2010)

AzurePhoenix said:


> And is anybody surprised that Arabs hate Perisans?


Maybe it's just the shia vs sunni thing.


----------



## Mayfurr (Nov 30, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I will never said everything the U.S has done is a good thing, Don't put words in my mouth. And I am not claiming that everything that has been done was for a good reason. But the way this information has been handled (Downloading military and state secret documents), was not good. Two wrongs don't make a right so to speak.



It's still pretty clear that you're more concerned with how this information got out_ as opposed to what dodgy shit your government is trying to pull in secret_. Somehow I don't think you'd be hung up on the "illegality" of the leaks (Downloading military and state secret documents) if it revealed that *China* was doing stuff like instructing their officials to spy on the UN leadership.


----------



## Azure (Nov 30, 2010)

Radio Viewer said:


> Maybe it's just the shia vs sunni thing.


It's not just that. It's that whole ancient tribal goat farmer bullshit, where somebody ate someone elses grass, or fucked somebodys virgin daughter, and 1000 years later they're all still butthurt over stupid, cultural bullshit. I can honestly say that the culture of the Middle East SUCKS BIGTIME.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 30, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> I never said you said those things. I said you were part of a group, and that a certain subset of said group held certain beliefs, and then defined said belief. Anything aside from that is stuff you assumed. And I also don't appreciate the insult, please try to remain civil.


 

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with my faith and beliefs. You ask me to be civil? Really? You of all people. You're the one coming in here spouting off your head that I am a Christian Fundie, and then telling people what I supposedly believe.(you are always putting words in my mouth) This thread is about wikileaks, Only. So try and keep it on topic.

I don't believe in "American Exceptionalism" . Never had I ever said that I do. So instead of spouting off what you think, I think. Ask instead of assuming.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 30, 2010)

Alright let me get this straight. You all here seem to think that the U.S is the only country who has espionage agencies and operations all around the world. Every modern country has espionage agencies. Welcome to foreign policy 101, Where everyone is trying to find out what the other guy is doing and trying to keep what they are doing a secret. Want some examples. Its common knowledge that China seems to hack into government files every other week. Or even better, how about when the U.S caught those 14 spies living in the country?

Lets not forget that all countries are spying on others. Its not just the United States.


Further more, Wikileaks founder is always on the run. He uses and encrypted cell phone, has fake Identities, and is always changing his looks... Why does he do this if he isn't guilty of something? Interpol has issued a red alert for him: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/assange-interpol/
Sounds like a great guy.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 30, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Alright let me get this straight. You all here seem to think that the U.S is the only country who has espionage agencies and operations all around the world. Every modern country has espionage agencies. Welcome to foreign policy 101


Thanks captain obvious.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 30, 2010)

Holsety said:


> Thanks captain obvious.


 
Well, it seems like people are bawwing over what the U.S is doing, seems like they think the U.S is the only country spying on people. So I guess I should point out the obvious.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 30, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Well, it seems like people are bawwing over what the U.S is doing, seems like they think the U.S is the only country spying on people. So I guess I should point out the obvious.


 Or you should get rid of your overinflated ego and stop pretending you are the sole intellectual amongst mongoloids


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Nov 30, 2010)

Holsety said:


> Or you should get rid of your overinflated ego and stop pretending you are the sole intellectual amongst mongoloids


 
Hmm, well considering I study military tactics, history and foreign policy as well as politics. I do have some knowledge in what I am talking about. Perhaps you should contribute to the thread instead of just posting for the sake of posting. I am not saying I know more than everyone. All I am saying is people seemed to have missed something that to me is very obvious.

Anyways, can we please stay on topic?


----------



## Carenath (Nov 30, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Why is the CIA involved in Anti-drug wars in Mexico and South America?
> Why is the U.S hunting for international terrorists in Syria, Yemen, Pakistan and Indonesia?
> 
> Why is the U.S sending peacekeeping forces to Haiti and African countries? Why is the U.S one of the biggest contributors to international aid? It affects the U.S and more importantly the U.S is trying to keep an area stable. Maybe the U.S should just stop help fight the massive drug cartels in Central and South America, maybe the U.S should stop all of its international aid. Perhaps the U.S should give the world its middle finger and say fuck you and watch the world fall into a complete mess because the U,.S won't help the world anymore. Maybe the entire world should just stop helping each other and only worry about their own country. (oh wait the EU just bailed out the entire country of Ireland giving it $110 Billion)


Why _is_ the CIA involved in enforcing US law in other sovereign territories? They've neither jurisdiction, nor are they responsible for law enforcement. Stuff like this is what turns people against the USA.
To paraphrase here, one man's poison is another man's food. Just because the US considers them terrorists, doesn't mean other countries do.

Oh and trying to deflect things by bringing in unrelated subject matter (Ireland's bailout by the IMF), isn't going to help you.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Further more, Wikileaks founder is always on the run. He uses and encrypted cell phone, has fake Identities, and is always changing his looks... Why does he do this if he isn't guilty of something? Interpol has issued a red alert for him: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/assange-interpol/
> Sounds like a great guy.


Given that he's been threatened more than once, by members of the intelligence community, having a phone they can't tap, and keeping his business private from them, doesn't seem all that unreasonable.
Given that he's pissed off more than one government, it's not surprising.

Go rent a copy of 'Enemy of the State' there's no shortage of truth in that film.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Dec 1, 2010)

The wikileaks hoster is probably a better spy than all the agents in all secret organizations. Well, other countries around him don't really want to stop him.
Information about an ally that is less likely to be ally? Why would you want to stop it? It will hurt the connections between countries the more leaks are seen, but everyone would always like to know more.
Also 





> "Why is the U.S hunting for international terrorists in Syria, Yemen, Pakistan and Indonesia?"


 - Most of you guys don't even know the defenition of terrorism.
People use terror to deliver messages. "Listen to me" they say. They express their opinion through plain murder. These people are terrorists.

"Terrorists" in Yemen, Syria, Indonesia and Pakistan? Those are muderers, nothing more


----------



## Eligos (Dec 1, 2010)

Just to bring some middle ground to this discussion, occasional leaks of sensitive information help keep a government honest, just like tax audits keep corporations honest. The fear that what you are doing may get exposed even after it's done probably keeps a lot of more terrible plots from ever being carried out. At the same time, I wish that this would have been a bit more carefully targeted. Nothing I have read about Manning makes me like the man. It seems this leak was him just trying to throw the biggest wrench he could out of boredom and a need for attention, rather than any patriotic or idealistic notions. I would have rather seen a responsible release of information that reveals actual abuses of power.

Any modern government is pretty much forced to engage in illegal and distasteful activities to some extent if it hopes to remain competitive on a world power. As much as I am disappointed that the US decided to abuse it's trust among UN officials, I wouldn't be particularly surprised if the act was in response to the fear that another country were all ready in the process. China in particularly scares me with the ruthless and relentless nature of its own espionage. Cyber-attacks not only against US government and corporate entities, but attacks relating to human-rights activists both in China and the US, and practically anyone else.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8458269.stm
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704722304575038080333488998.html
http://www.examiner.com/law-enforce...pionage-britain-s-mi5-reports-epidemic-spying

The US isn't the only one playing dirty on the world stage. We don't even play the dirtiest. I am glad to see some of the wikileaks information see the light of day so that the government is aware it's citizenry is still keeping an eye on it. At the same time I recognize that a certain level of secrecy and nastiness is currently required for my government to protect itself, and secondarily me. A government that doesn't fight to protect itself isn't really doing its job.


----------



## Telnac (Dec 1, 2010)

Regardless of the contents of the information leaked, this is classified information given to a foreign individual who's openly proclaimed a desire to harm US national interests and security.  This isn't an issue of free speech or freedom of the press.  This is no different than leaking classified information to Al Qaeda.  Any government official who knowingly feeds Wikileaks classified documents should be charged with treason & punished accordingly.  I don't know why the US Government is treating this with kid gloves when this is a very serious crime!

As for the contents of what was leaked... nothing anyone's really surprised about.  But the fact that this asshole is listing the names & contact information of people who've aided US forces not only puts their lives at stake but also makes it less likely that anyone will cooperate with US forces in the future.  I really don't care why he's doing it; it's loathsome.  If I saw him crossing the street, not only would I not brake, I'd speed up and be sure to aim carefully.


----------



## Squeak (Dec 1, 2010)

Because the most Holy and Benevolent Government is always correct in everything it does and should never be opposed?

-Squeak (anti-nationalist, anti-patriot, mostly anti-state)


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 1, 2010)

Telnac said:


> Regardless of the contents of the information leaked, this is classified information given to a foreign individual *who's openly proclaimed a desire to harm US national interests and security. *


 
Citation, please. An *actual quote* from the gentleman concerned, not what _someone else_ says about him.


----------



## lukewarner101 (Dec 1, 2010)

Ah the way I see it if it's a secret it's going to come out one way or the other. Exception: the Russians, they sure keep everything bottled tight.
As for wiki leaks, they should publish everything they get there hands on, I say freedom of information is critical on the internetz no matter what they may be. It's funny how the US news media is soaking it all up and talking about this. Mostly 90% of the time they are scared to ask the questions or try and pursue them. Lazy bums trying to rely on someone else who will risk there neck for the truth or some decent information.


----------



## Zaraphayx (Dec 1, 2010)

Without throwing my own equally worthless 2 cents into this potluck of partially informed opinions I'd like to marvel at how easy it is to set Rukh off.


----------



## Telnac (Dec 1, 2010)

Mayfurr said:


> Citation, please. An *actual quote* from the gentleman concerned, not what _someone else_ says about him.


 Apologies.  It seems the sources I've read can't themselves back their claims up so I'll retract what I said.

That said, I still believe that leaking details that put the lives of others at risk is deplorable & irresponsible.  Yeah, the US does shady stuff.  So what?  Does that justify releasing information that puts lives at risk?  No.

The only "good" thing this does is demonstrate that the US & possibly other countries need to do a better job at keeping secrets secret.  I expect policies regarding access to secret documents & how such documents are stored will be the only things that'll change.  This won't do anything to stop the US from doing what it needs to do to protect its interests around the world.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 1, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> This thread has absolutely nothing to do with my faith and beliefs.
> 
> You ask me to be civil? Really? You of all people. You're the one coming in here spouting off your head that I am a Christian Fundie, and then telling people what I supposedly believe.(you are always putting words in my mouth) This thread is about wikileaks, Only. So try and keep it on topic.
> 
> I don't believe in "American Exceptionalism" . Never had I ever said that I do. So instead of spouting off what you think, I think. Ask instead of assuming.


 
Putting forward your beliefs and then saying your beliefs don't matter to the situation what

Well yes, I've always been civil, and you are one are you not? You've repeatedly expressed complete unblinking faith in your religion, and are expressing a similiar one in the US government. I did notbring up your faith, I simply mentioned a certain subset of your faith that has that belief.. Instead of going after me you could have simply said in the first place "I don't believe America was pre-ordained or blessed by God to be the greatest country and always morally right on God's command nor do I endorse said people." or the like, and then moved on, instead of blowing a gasket and trying to make it personal like you always do, Rukh.




Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Lets not forget that all countries are spying on others. Its not just the United States.
> 
> Further more, Wikileaks founder is always on the run. He uses and encrypted cell phone, has fake Identities, and is always changing his looks... Why does he do this if he isn't guilty of something? Interpol has issued a red alert for him.


 
For the same reason people go into witness protection programs or the like. Just because they're in hiding doesn't neccisarily mean that the people after him are being just. He probably thinks he's doing the right thing and that the governments going after him for simply spreading information, (not even sensitive militiary information, just things like who's spying on who on america's behalf which other non-american countries would love to know) and that it's the US government being not on the up and up here. The fact other countries are spying too doesn't make it right for america to do so. Two wrongs don't make a right you know, Rukh.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 1, 2010)

Carenath said:


> Why _is_ the CIA involved in enforcing US law in other sovereign territories? They've neither jurisdiction, nor are they responsible for law enforcement. Stuff like this is what turns people against the USA.
> To paraphrase here, one man's poison is another man's food. Just because the US considers them terrorists, doesn't mean other countries do.
> 
> Oh and trying to deflect things by bringing in unrelated subject matter (Ireland's bailout by the IMF), isn't going to help you.
> ...


 
You do know what the CIA is don't you? Its a spy agency. Its a agency that lives outside of "normal laws" Thats its job. Hell, if we knew half the stuff the CIA did it probably wouldn't be a pretty picture. Black ops, deep cover operations, sponsored regime changes, assassinations, espionage. The CIA has really no laws it follows other than its own. Thats what makes them special. But this describes every other intelligence agency around the world for every modern nation. I am not condoneing what The U.S has done. But it doesn't suprise me at all. If this was China or Russia being outed, I would say the same thing. I wouldn't be angry. The whole point of intelligence is to find out what the other guy is doing without him knowing it. 

Secondly, Interpol is after Julian Assange (Wikileaks Founder) Because he is wanted in Sweden for child rape and molestation...


----------



## Azure (Dec 1, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Secondly, Interpol is after Julian Assange (Wikileaks Founder) Because he is wanted in Sweden for child rape and molestation...


Yet to be proven. I find it INCREDIBLY hard to believe that a man who leaks sensitive documents over the internet that end of pissing off big muckers would have some baby fucking skeletons in his closet. How stupid do you have to be? As you purport, the CIA lives outside the law yes? Could it be they make things different than they appear? Honestly a no brainer, except they forgot that their credibility has been suspect since the late 70's.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Dec 1, 2010)

The USA is not alone in the world - it might seem very big and pretty, but it has enough enemies. Leaks can turn the number of enemies even bigger.
There is no freedom of speech here, not at all - leaks are leaks. The one who hijacked the files will not get out of this very easily.
The owner of WikiLeaks must be very proud for all his attention. The CIA is in shame - it is vulnerable after such a loss. It's not the only agency vulnerable around the time being in the present, but the US is now a living target for many. Everyone knows the CIA, but you should always remember that many other countries have agencies as well, and right now they are sniffing around the US hoping to find more information.


The americans fall again.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Dec 1, 2010)

lucaaat said:


> I might add that the founder of wikileaks is now chased by INTERPOL in 180+ countries for "Sexual molesty" in.. sweden? I think it's sweden. ANyways, what a coincidence!


I think you're mistaking the pirate bay which is in Sweden with the founder of wikileaks. Also, the interpol doesn't chase people in over 180 countries, without mentioning that at least 10% of the countries are ones that would kill you on the airplane. The interpol does not chase sexual molesters *worldwide*. It can, and it does that, but in limited area.


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 1, 2010)

CynicalCirno said:


> Also, the interpol doesn't chase people in over 180 countries, without mentioning that at least 10% of the countries are ones that would kill you on the airplane. The interpol does not chase sexual molesters *worldwide*. It can, and it does that, but in limited area.


 


lucaaat said:


> I am just referring what national news just said (Italy)



Technically, Interpol hasn't issued an _arrest warrant_ - this is an "if you see him, tell us / extradite him to the US" notice:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11883567


> Interpol has issued a "Red Notice" for the founder of the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, Julian Assange.
> 
> It said the Australian was wanted for questioning in Sweden over an alleged sex offence, which he has denied.
> 
> *The Red Notice does not amount to an arrest warrant. Instead, it asks people to contact the police if they have any information about his whereabouts. *



Like Azure says, it seems rather _too_ co-incidental that this stuff is coming out about Assange just after Wikileaks has released embarrassing stuff about the US...


----------



## Lobar (Dec 1, 2010)

I say we handle leakers in chronological order.  Try, convict, and execute Dick Cheney before we get to this guy.


----------



## Carenath (Dec 1, 2010)

Telnac said:


> Regardless of the contents of the information leaked, this is classified information given to a foreign individual who's openly proclaimed *a desire to harm US national interests* and security.  This isn't an issue of free speech or freedom of the press.  This is no different than leaking classified information to Al Qaeda.  Any government official who knowingly feeds Wikileaks classified documents should be charged with treason & punished accordingly.  I don't know why the US Government is treating this with kid gloves when this is a very serious crime!


Given the inherently selfish nature, of any counties 'interests', it's unreasonable to assume that any non-US national would be in favour of what would be foreign interests.
Further to that, 'US interests' is increasingly a euphemism for US _corporate_ interests, and as the US has demonstrated a repeated and wilful disregard for foreign national soverignty and law, I don't think that's a bad view to hold. I'm sure Jon Johansen, Dmitry Skylarov and the staff at PRQ would agree with me. To say nothing about that innocent German citizen that was unlawfully detained.



Telnac said:


> As for the contents of what was leaked... nothing anyone's really surprised about.  But the fact that this asshole is listing the names & contact information of people who've aided US forces not only puts their lives at stake but also makes it less likely that anyone will cooperate with US forces in the future.  I really don't care why he's doing it; it's loathsome.  If I saw him crossing the street, not only would I not brake, I'd speed up and be sure to aim carefully.


Last I read, he redacted the names and contact information, but I would agree with you on the _irresponsible_ leaking of information that _puts lives at risk_.



Telnac said:


> ...This won't do anything to stop the US from doing what it needs to do to protect its interests around the world.


Perhaps not, but an informed public, is an armed public, and if this information gives the people the information to attack unjust actions on behalf of the US, I'm all for it. I will say again though *I do not condone putting peoples lives at risk*.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> You do know what the CIA is don't you? Its a spy agency. Its a agency that lives outside of "normal laws" Thats its job. Hell, if we knew half the stuff the CIA did it probably wouldn't be a pretty picture. Black ops, deep cover operations, sponsored regime changes, assassinations, espionage. The CIA has really no laws it follows other than its own. Thats what makes them special. But this describes every other intelligence agency around the world for every modern nation. I am not condoneing what The U.S has done. But it doesn't suprise me at all. If this was China or Russia being outed, I would say the same thing. I wouldn't be angry. The whole point of intelligence is to find out what the other guy is doing without him knowing it.


That is no justification, it is blatant hypocrisy. I'm aware that this kind of stuff happens all the time, just look at China, it's another gear in the chain that drives my cynicism about Government and foreign actions and intents. Besides, gathering intelligence is one thing, it's the intents and purposes behind it, and some of the unjustifiable (and illegal) actions that have been revealed that make this such an issue worth being made public.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Secondly, Interpol is after Julian Assange (Wikileaks Founder) Because he is wanted in Sweden for child rape and molestation...


 And that doesn't strike you as the least bit of convenient that such an allegation can come out, stop being so naive


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 1, 2010)

CynicalCirno said:


> I think you're mistaking the pirate bay which is in Sweden with the founder of wikileaks. Also, the interpol doesn't chase people in over 180 countries, without mentioning that at least 10% of the countries are ones that would kill you on the airplane. The interpol does not chase sexual molesters *worldwide*. It can, and it does that, but in limited area.


 
I am mistaken am I?, Julian Assange (Founder of wilileaks) Wanted by Interpol
Here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/30/interpol-julian-assange-r_n_790157.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704594804575649212491235430.html

I am not mistaken. Its all over the news.


----------



## Azure (Dec 1, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> I am mistaken am I?, Julian Assange (Founder of wilileaks) Wanted by Interpol
> Here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/30/interpol-julian-assange-r_n_790157.html
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704594804575649212491235430.html
> 
> I am not mistaken. Its all over the news.


Have you read your links? Do you know his "SEX CRIME"? Read it, and wonder to yourself if you actually believe lameduck charges like that. I'm pretty sure, with all their money and connections, the CIA had little trouble watching his activities, and finding the right palm to grease. If you knew anything about how the international espionage community actually works, you'd see right through this farcical attempt at blackmail. And even at the end of it all, I'm not worried about the character of the man who exposes corruption at such high levels, it doesn't enter into the fact that we and many others got caught with our hands in the cookie jar. It's about time those bastards took a slap, because if they don't, guess who takes it for them? You and me. Mostly me. I'd garrote the bastards myself if given the chance.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 1, 2010)

AzurePhoenix said:


> Have you read your links? Do you know his "SEX CRIME"? Read it, and wonder to yourself if you actually believe lameduck charges like that. I'm pretty sure, with all their money and connections, the CIA had little trouble watching his activities, and finding the right palm to grease. If you knew anything about how the international espionage community actually works, you'd see right through this farcical attempt at blackmail. And even at the end of it all, I'm not worried about the character of the man who exposes corruption at such high levels, it doesn't enter into the fact that we and many others got caught with our hands in the cookie jar. It's about time those bastards took a slap.


 
Interpol levied those charges, By request from Sweden. Not the U.S Government. You do know who Interpol is don't you? (International Criminal Police Organization) Furthermore Sweden is after the guy as well.
If the CIA has little trouble in watching Julian Assange, then why can't he be found. Why does nobody know where he is?

In a statement, Interpol said it issued this "international wanted  persons alert" in all 188 Interpol member countries worldwide, *at the  request of Swedish authorities*, who want to question Mr. Assange "in  connection with a number of sexual offences."


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 2, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> In a statement, Interpol said it issued this "international wanted  persons alert" in all 188 Interpol member countries worldwide, *at the  request of Swedish authorities*, who want to question Mr. Assange "in  connection with a number of sexual offences."


 
I heard a news report on local radio this morning that said Assange _had confirmed with Swedish authorities that it was okay for him to leave Sweden despite all the sexual offences business_ - now that more stuff has been leaked from Wikileaks, all of a sudden the hunt is on for him again? Coincidence? I think not.

(Meanwhile Sarah Palin reckons Assange should be hunted down like bin Laden - does she mean unsuccessfully pursued at great expense over ten years?  )

Nevertheless, as AzurePhoenix points out, the fact remains that the hypocrisy and deceit of the US government (and others) has been laid bare to the world. Including a secret deal between the US and the UK to sidestep the Convention on Cluster Munitions - allowing the US to bring weapons on to British soil in defiance of the treaty that Britain signed, while the British government _deceived their own Parliament_ as to what was going on. 

As one commentator has put it, _"Official America's reaction to the largest leak of confidential government files in history is tipping over towards derangement. What the White House initially denounced as a life-threatening "criminal" act and Hillary Clinton branded an "attack on the international community" has been taken a menacing stage further by the newly emboldened Republican right. [...] Not much truck with freedom of information, then, in the land of the free. In reality, *most of the leaked material is fairly low-level diplomatic gossip*, which naturally reflects the US government's view of the world, and crucially doesn't include reports with the highest security classification."_


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 2, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Man, I'm totally all for democracies because I believe that governments should be held accountable by their people, but how dare someone do anything to embarass america! It's totally not vital information, but this guy needs to be brought in and executed as a disgraced war criminal!


 
:V


----------



## Azure (Dec 2, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Interpol levied those charges, By request from Sweden. Not the U.S Government. You do know who Interpol is don't you? (International Criminal Police Organization) Furthermore Sweden is after the guy as well.
> If the CIA has little trouble in watching Julian Assange, then why can't he be found. Why does nobody know where he is?
> 
> In a statement, Interpol said it issued this "international wanted persons alert" in all 188 Interpol member countries worldwide, *at the request of Swedish authorities*, who want to question Mr. Assange "in connection with a number of sexual offences."


You are an astoundingly obtuse person, do you know that? You probably don't. The CIA can't tell their asshole from their elbows, let alone find a man who isn't on the run from anyone. Shit, they can't even find Bin Laden, how are they gonna catch this criminal mastermind?


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Dec 2, 2010)

AzurePhoenix said:


> Nothing too groundbreaking was leaked yet, at least, if you actually follow geopolitical power plays as a hobby. And is anybody surprised that Arabs hate Perisans?


 
Haven't they hated Persians for like, the past 3000 years?


----------



## Tycho (Dec 2, 2010)

Lobar said:


> I say we handle leakers in chronological order.  Try, convict, and execute Dick Cheney before we get to this guy.


 
Televised plz, I want to see it myself.  I have a bet going with someone that when Cheney is executed his body will evaporate in a blood-red fog and there will be a horrible screeching, hissing sound as the veil closes and seals his vile essence away from the living world.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 3, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Televised plz, I want to see it myself.  I have a bet going with someone that when Cheney is executed his body will evaporate in a blood-red fog and there will be a horrible screeching, hissing sound as the veil closes and seals his vile essence away from the living world.


 
Will that be before or after Bush?


----------



## Azure (Dec 3, 2010)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Haven't they hated Persians for like, the past 3000 years?


Nah, maybe a bit less. It depends on who is telling the story about the Great Goatfucking Incident, or the Year of the Raped Virgins. Who knows, they're all stupid as hell. I like Persians more out of the two, because secretly like 40% of Iran is Atheist. Trufax


----------



## Tycho (Dec 3, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> Will that be before or after Bush?


 
Oh, they'll just stop winding up the key in Bush's back instead of executing him.  Then they'll put him back in the toy chest with all the other cymbal-clapping monkeys and chattering teeth.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 5, 2010)

lucaaat said:


> I might add that the founder of wikileaks is now chased by INTERPOL in 180+ countries for "Sexual molesty" in.. sweden? I think it's sweden. ANyways, what a coincidence!


 
what i find incredibly amusing about the whole sexual molestation allegations is that it all seems just a bit too conveniently timed... 

honestly, if that is the best that the CIA can do... maybe they DO need to be leaked to the point where they have to dissolve.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 5, 2010)

Carenath said:


> and as the US has demonstrated a repeated and wilful disregard for foreign national soverignty and law


 
oh gods, THIS so hard... the extradition of Marc Emery, anyone?


----------



## Azure (Dec 5, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Oh, they'll just stop winding up the key in Bush's back instead of executing him. Then they'll put him back in the toy chest with all the other cymbal-clapping monkeys and chattering teeth.


So, secretly, Bush was Nazi Zombies?


----------



## CannonFodder (Dec 5, 2010)

Oh god no, my IP provider is blocking me from accessing it


----------



## Redregon (Dec 5, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> Oh god no, my IP provider is blocking me from accessing it


 
can you access it through another domain? (and is there a "this site is blocked" page or just a 404?)

http://noconscience.com/ <-- listed there

(i can't access it either through the wikileaks.org webaddress but i can get to it through other portals.)


----------



## Attaman (Dec 5, 2010)

This is what Interpol wants him for, people.  Not child rape.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 5, 2010)

Attaman said:


> This is what Interpol wants him for, people.  Not child rape.


 
OH gods that's hilarious LOL XD


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 5, 2010)

Attaman said:


> This is what Interpol wants him for, people.  Not child rape.


 
A leak of a different kind, then? 

(I'll get my coat...)


----------



## Tycho (Dec 5, 2010)

j/w can anyone name one good thing to come from his leaking of the diplomatic cables?

I mean, what exactly does embarrassing people by letting their grumblings and gossips about other countries leak to the whole world accomplish?


----------



## Carenath (Dec 5, 2010)

Redregon said:


> oh gods, THIS so hard... the extradition of Marc Emery, anyone?


 Or the unlawful harssment and arrest of PRQ staff, the unwarrented siezure of servers and equipment at their premises.
The unlawful harassment, arrest and attempted prosecution of Jon Johansen.
The unlawful arrest and prosecution of Dmitry Skylarov.

I think I broke the 'this' button..


----------



## Redregon (Dec 5, 2010)

Tycho said:


> j/w can anyone name one good thing to come from his leaking of the diplomatic cables?
> 
> I mean, what exactly does embarrassing people by letting their grumblings and gossips about other countries leak to the whole world accomplish?


 
forces the U.S. to be honest? (for once?)


----------



## Tycho (Dec 5, 2010)

Redregon said:


> forces the U.S. to be honest? (for once?)


 
Honest about WHAT? The fact that they think certain people are poopooheads and dumdums? This is something that goes on in our lives every day.  We see the idiot holding up the checkout line and we grumble to ourselves about how stupid that guy is and we get home and we vent about how stupid that guy is to all our friends and the next day we wake up and go to work and that guy walks into our shop and we say "Hello, how may I help you, sir?" with a polite smile on our little fucking faces.

Diplomacy is business.  You're the diplomat.  He's the foreign official who is stupid and holds up checkout lines.  Why don't you tell this man how stupid you think he is for holding up that checkout line? You don't because it's your job to at least *pretend* to be polite to the people you serve.  How would you like it if someone posted comments you made about a boss or coworker, like "he is such a closeted fag" or "I think he must be on drugs" or "She smells like fish constantly, does the bitch ever wash down there?" or "Don't tell the boss but I spit into her latte lol", up where they could see it? Fuck, man, those are private rants and vents between you and a few friends.  Now your job's on the line.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 5, 2010)

more to the fact that they've been spying on their "allies" or actively engaging in espionage against UN officials (which is against international law afaik)

((those are the two that came up in my mind... i'm sure i could find others if i was arsed to look them up.))


----------



## Aden (Dec 5, 2010)

Downloaded the "Insurance" file today. Maybe something will become of it.



Tycho said:


> Honest about WHAT?


 


> United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apparently orders diplomats to obtain credit card and frequent flier numbers of the French, British, Russian and Chinese delegations to the United Nations Security Council. Other revelations reportedly include that several Arab nations urged the U.S. to launch a first strike on Iran, that the Chinese government was directly involved in computer hacking, and that the U.S. is pressuring Pakistan to turn over nuclear material to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands.



Not to mention that previous leaks have accounted for a few thousand supposedly "missing" combatants whose status were being withheld, etc, etc.


----------



## CannonFodder (Dec 5, 2010)

Goddamn, how many reports does scientology have on them?


----------



## Tycho (Dec 5, 2010)

> United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apparently orders diplomats to obtain credit card and frequent flier numbers of the French, British, Russian and Chinese delegations to the United Nations Security Council. Other revelations reportedly include that several Arab nations urged the U.S. to launch a first strike on Iran, that the Chinese government was directly involved in computer hacking, and that the U.S. is pressuring Pakistan to turn over nuclear material to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands.



How does the PUBLIC knowledge of any of these things empower either people or their government?


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Dec 5, 2010)

Tycho said:


> How does the PUBLIC knowledge of any of these things empower either people or their government?


 
Keeps us informed on the general goings-on around the world.  Information like this can also help give context towards real life events that have, are, or will happen.

This information may not be necessary for living your daily life, but for those interested or concerned with the state of international politics and diplomacy, this is extremely helpful towards understanding the artificial universe of political relationships.


----------



## aiden749 (Dec 5, 2010)

I commend the soldier that did the leak, we need more people willing to expose the truths of governments.

Also, there seems to be too many people freaked out about this, and what must be said is that we'll be fine.

i.e. Pentagon Papers anyone?


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 6, 2010)

Tycho said:


> How does the PUBLIC knowledge of any of these things empower either people or their government?



Because "it keeps the bastards honest"?

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41868.html


> It's thanks mainly to Julian Assange and Wikileaks that people around the world finally have a little insight into the brutality and venality of US foreign policy. Assanges' quest to let people all over the world know the truth and his refusal to stand mute in the face of duplicity and injustice deserve our praise. Moral courage of that calibre is rarely seen nowadays, and people need to know what is really happening and why. I*f he didn't publish these documents you can bet we would never have known the truths they contain.
> *
> Yet a concerted program of personal vilification and an international manhunt continues. After all, hell hath no fury like bruised, frustrated Capitol Hill and Wall Street egos. *Do political leaders really believe that Assange is the only person on the planet who wants governments to be open, transparent and accountable?* Do they think he's the only person who understands that our governments are almost pathologically incapable of telling the truth, or that they authorise the commission of despicable acts in our names behind hypocritical calls to freedom and democracy? (emphasis added)


----------



## Rilvor (Dec 6, 2010)

I merely wonder, if the news began as something to keep the government honest and open but ultimately fell to misinformation and such, just how terribly long one website will last before the same?

Assuming it already isn't, of course.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 6, 2010)

Mayfurr said:


> Because "it keeps the bastards honest"?


 
"It keeps the bastards honest" is vague and banal.  It's a CATCHPHRASE.

Did people EVER really think foreign policy was about blueberry-muffin gift baskets, coffee klatches and discussion of thermonuclear warheads and natural gas prices over games of Yahtzee? Some of you guys must have a terribly charmed notion of what foreign politics should be like.  Revealing the statuses of thousands of combatants gone missing is great for their families (or perhaps not so great, depending), sussing out massive corruption on the scale of the Italian PM's love affair with Vladimir Putin and his natural gas(?) assets is definitely good, but discovering that our governments are all really paranoid about one another and that some of the "big guys" like the USA are constantly trying to throw their weight around to influence other countries' policies? This is something we ALWAYS knew was happening, and while we generally never APPROVE of it we accept it as being an immutable part of the "douchebags dealing with other douchebags on the international level" schtick and relegate our complaints to the arena of standard bitching-and-whining about government's foibles in general as we knowingly enjoy whatever security and prosperity those liars, cheats and thieves in our country's employ manage to lie, cheat and steal from the other countries.  "Politics," we grumble.  "Buncha liars and corrupt bozos." we grumble.  "Always fleecing people and screwing over other countries," we grumble.  DUH.  To change this would require MORE than transparency, it would require that every diplomatic official in the WORLD adopt a new and radical mentality that is quite frankly ALIEN to most of HUMANITY.



Rilvor said:


> I merely wonder, if the news began as something to keep the government honest and open but ultimately fell to misinformation and such, just how terribly long one website will last before the same?
> 
> Assuming it already isn't, of course.



Personal opinion - I'm guessing WikiLeaks originally started out with the premise of being a crusader for government transparency and then shot itself in the fucking foot by not being choosier about the articles/cables it leaked.  It leaked a BUNCH of stuff that amounted to little more than revelations about how the USA and other countries think other countries' officials are crazy or dumb or whatever, which serves no real purpose other than to PISS OFF people.  And it did PISS OFF a lot of people that it didn't need to piss off, over GOSSIP.  Assange IS an egomaniac, no two ways about it, and he thinks he is an agent of global diplomatic revolution or something.  Manning was a low-level intel analyst who got a bug up his ass one day about something - whether his intent was to enact positive change or just to be spiteful/stick it to "the man" is a question only he could honestly answer I suppose - and decided to blow the lid off of a lot of things.  I'm guessing he didn't actually read a lot of these things, given how many there WERE.  If he had he might have not bothered leaking the gossip and revelations of paranoia and distrust and animosity between countries and would have focused on the far more leakworthy subjects.  He and Assange effectively turned a "reputable newspaper" into a "gossip-rag tabloid" by deciding to dump the entirety of their digital delving onto the Internet.

To ME, as a citizen who is supposed to be "empowered" by all of this new knowledge, things like "The Saudis want the USA to blast on Iran" are mildly interesting but not terribly helpful nor surprising.  Almost nobody really likes Iran, the mullahs and Ahmedinejad.  Seriously.  They do not have many friends.  People who rattle sabers and threaten to start nuclear war in other people's backyards generally are not popular (see also: North Korea), and the Saudis have been making a habit of leaning on us to do things for a while now (Both Bushes were Saudi pawns IMO).  Most of the impetus for the first invasion of Iraq came from the Saudis, and the consequent pullout before the job was "finished" was also likely a result of Saudi influence.  The underlying Sunni-Shia animosity present in the Saudis' contempt for Iran is a GIVEN.


----------



## Azure (Dec 6, 2010)

Tycho said:


> "It keeps the bastards honest" is vague and banal. It's a CATCHPHRASE.
> 
> Did people EVER really think foreign policy was about blueberry-muffin gift baskets, coffee klatches and discussion of thermonuclear warheads and natural gas prices over games of Yahtzee? Some of you guys must have a terribly charmed notion of what foreign politics should be like. Revealing the statuses of thousands of combatants gone missing is great for their families (or perhaps not so great, depending), sussing out massive corruption on the scale of the Italian PM's love affair with Vladimir Putin and his natural gas(?) assets is definitely good, but discovering that our governments are all really paranoid about one another and that some of the "big guys" like the USA are constantly trying to throw their weight around to influence other countries' policies? This is something we ALWAYS knew was happening, and while we generally never APPROVE of it we accept it as being an immutable part of the "douchebags dealing with other douchebags on the international level" schtick and relegate our complaints to the arena of standard bitching-and-whining about government's foibles in general as we knowingly enjoy whatever security and prosperity those liars, cheats and thieves in our country's employ manage to lie, cheat and steal from the other countries. "Politics," we grumble. "Buncha liars and corrupt bozos." we grumble. "Always fleecing people and screwing over other countries," we grumble. DUH. To change this would require MORE than transparency, it would require that every diplomatic official in the WORLD adopt a new and radical mentality that is quite frankly ALIEN to most of HUMANITY.
> 
> ...


I agree with some of this. Nothing remotely groundbreaking was leaked for people who actually pay attention, and the intel and espionage world is largely left out of these leaks, because personally, I think he'safraid to leak anything else, or just doesn't have any material besides international gossip. Either way, this little business with "CableGate" is just going to be a bump in the road for most of the folks involved.

One thing about this whole business that irritates me is the whole talk of "treason" and whether or not Assange should be tried for it. Hey, Fox News, he's not a citizen of this country last I checked, so no, you CANT try him for that. The lowly intel guy? Fuck him, who cares, what an unprofessional asshole trying to claim a piece of glory. He'll get all the law can throw at him, because he's just a pawn trying to cash in.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 6, 2010)

Azure said:


> I agree with some of this. Nothing remotely groundbreaking was leaked for people who actually pay attention, and the intel and espionage world is largely left out of these leaks, because personally, I think he'safraid to leak anything else, or just doesn't have any material besides international gossip. Either way, this little business with "CableGate" is just going to be a bump in the road for most of the folks involved.
> 
> One thing about this whole business that irritates me is the whole talk of "treason" and whether or not Assange should be tried for it. Hey, Fox News, he's not a citizen of this country last I checked, so no, you CANT try him for that. The lowly intel guy? Fuck him, who cares, what an unprofessional asshole trying to claim a piece of glory. He'll get all the law can throw at him, because he's just a pawn trying to cash in.


 
"Treason" is a buzzword for the media, it sounds really sinister and makes people get all "*gasp* how dare he" over the matter.  I mean, no one likes traitors, they get the lowest level of hell in Dante's Inferno FFS.  Wanna make someone everyone else's worst enemy? Call him "traitor".

Also, I heard that he just leaked a bunch of sensitive information about sites that are strategically important to the USA (RL sites, not websites).  He just painted bullseyes on a lot of places and people could actually be hurt by this leak.  If he wasn't an enemy of the USA before he sure as hell is now.  Good job, Assange.  They'll probably never find your body.


----------



## Aden (Dec 6, 2010)

How can he be a traitor or be committing treason? He's from _fucking Australia_.


----------



## yiffytimesnews (Dec 6, 2010)

But I think it's interesting what has happened since that last leak. Pay Pal closed their account, 2 of their bank accounts have been shut down, and it's owner hiding out on a sexual assault warrant. Not to forget Amazon who hosted their site, told them to find another host which they did do.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 6, 2010)

Aden said:


> How can he be a traitor or be committing treason? He's from _fucking Australia_.


 
The U.S Government may be able to charge him as an accomplice to espionage. And before everyone says "thats what the U.S is doing". Every country has outlawed espionage. But that doesn't mean countries don't do it to other countries. Thats part of foreign policy.

The U.S is looking to charge Assange with something. Its not saying they can just because they want to. But they are looking into to see if legally they can.


----------



## Aden (Dec 6, 2010)

yiffytimesnews said:


> But I think it's interesting what has happened since that last leak. Pay Pal closed their account, 2 of their bank accounts have been shut down, and it's owner hiding out on a *sexual assault* warrant. Not to forget Amazon who hosted their site, told them to find another host which they did do.


 
aka bad character smear revolving around an obscure swedish law that says sex without a condom can be faced with a fine
I expected better from the US honestly


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 6, 2010)

yiffytimesnews said:


> But I think it's interesting what has happened since that last leak. Pay Pal closed their account, 2 of their bank accounts have been shut down, and it's owner hiding out on a sexual assault warrant. Not to forget Amazon who hosted their site, told them to find another host which they did do.


 

What Wikileaks did, did more harm to itself than anything else. Almost everything Wikileaks has on its website is ani-U.S. Its no secret that Assange is anti-American.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 6, 2010)

Aden said:


> aka bad character smear revolving around an obscure swedish law that says sex without a condom can be faced with a fine
> I expected better from the US honestly


 
The U.S didn't charge him with that. Sweden did. Interpol wants him. The U.S coudn't care less about the sexual molestation and rape charges against Assange. The U.S is looking into is releasing hundreds of thousands of classified documents by a non national is illegal or not.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 6, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> The U.S didn't charge him with that. Sweden did. Interpol wants him. The U.S coudn't care less about the sexual molestation and rape charges against Assange. The U.S is looking into is releasing hundreds of thousands of classified documents by a non national is illegal or not.


 
if it's not such a big deal for the US, then why are they running like chickens with their heads lopped off in response to the whole thing? why are politicians calling for people to assassinate him? don't you think that's kinda telling how they feel threatened by the leaks? and again, if they're no big deal, why would they feel threatened? 

basically, if they have done no wrong, they should have nothing to worry about.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 6, 2010)

Aden said:


> How can he be a traitor or be committing treason? He's from _fucking Australia_.



If he ends up jeopardizing the lives of Australian officials or soldiers, he is indeed committing treason.  He's also engaging in spy warfare with a number of countries, not just the US.



Aden said:


> aka bad character smear revolving around an obscure swedish law that says sex without a condom can be faced with a fine
> I expected better from the US honestly


 
They took what they could get at the moment.  I don't entirely blame them at this point.  They're in a hurry to find this guy and try and stop him from causing more actual damage, "transparency" be damned.  Assange is not a hero for any cause.  He's a megalomaniac.  His cause is his own fame.

And for all who would champion the cause off transparency in government and international diplomacy - WikiLeaks will quite possibly put the kibosh on any improvements in transparency because now governments are going to button up really fucking tight, and even BREATHING the word "transparency" will be pure poison for anyone's career.  Say "transparency", think "WikiLeaks debacle" will be what goes through governments' collective minds.


----------



## Azure (Dec 6, 2010)

It's a shame he didn't pop with hotter, more relevant shit. At least his eventual murder would mean something, as it stands, he's no better than a papparazzo out for some fresh, irrelevent bullshit. Rats off to ya, buddy! Hope  they find your body :V


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 6, 2010)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101207/ap_on_hi_te/wikileaks

Assange may surrender to the British Police.


----------



## Torrijos-sama (Dec 6, 2010)

Tycho said:


> If he ends up jeopardizing the lives of Australian officials or soldiers, he is indeed committing treason. He's also engaging in spy warfare with a number of countries, not just the US.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Political Correctness and National Security are the worst things to have ever happened to the concept of "Freedom of Speech" in the United States.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 6, 2010)

JesusFish said:


> Political Correctness and National Security are the worst things to have ever happened to the concept of "Freedom of Speech" in the United States.


 
They're both founded upon fear.

Freedom of speech should be tempered by discretion.  Discretion.  This is an important fucking concept.  It may seem vague but with the application of rational thought it becomes fairly clear.  There are some things for which the benefit (if any) is not worth whatever sacrifice would have to be made.  Just because you CAN do something does not mean you necessarily SHOULD.


----------



## Carenath (Dec 6, 2010)

Azure said:


> One thing about this whole business that irritates me is the whole talk of "treason" and whether or not Assange should be tried for it. *Hey, Fox News, he's not a citizen of this country last I checked, so no, you CANT try him for that.* The lowly intel guy? Fuck him, who cares, what an unprofessional asshole trying to claim a piece of glory. He'll get all the law can throw at him, because he's just a pawn trying to cash in.


Tell that, to the various people the US has prosecuted-by-proxy, applying US Law on foreign soil, because those individuals managed to piss off people with power.



Aden said:


> How can he be a traitor or be committing treason? He's from _fucking Australia_.


 Jon Johansen, was arrested and tried in Norway.. under pressure from the US.. for, apparently, breaking a US law (which obviously doesn't apply to foreign sovereign territories).
Dmitry Skylarov was arrested at a US airport when he went there to give a presentation. He didn't break any laws while in the US, but he was still arrested, prosecuted and jailed, for what he did in his home country, that pissed off a large US corporation.
Swedish authorities, again acting on heavy US pressure, comitted an unlawful raid on PRQ (a rather well-known Swedish ISP).

None of these individuals broke any laws in their countries, but that didn't matter to US authorities.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> What Wikileaks did, did more harm to itself than anything else. Almost everything Wikileaks has on its website is ani-U.S. Its no secret that Assange is anti-American.


 Wikileaks, was always going to 'do more harm to itself' by your logic, because their sole mission was to provide a place to post information, vested interests want to keep hidden from the populace.
Also, do ask yourself.. given what I've said, in response to Aden and Azure.. and what I have said before about:
The unlawful detention of a German Citzen, in his own country, by CIA agents.
The unlawful coercion and attempted prosecutions of foreign nationals, in their own countries, by the US (by proxy).
The unlawful arrest, prosecution and incarceration of a Russian Citizen, after landing at a US airport, having broken no laws while in the US.

Basically the fact that the US has given many people, with a sence of justice and morality, cause to distrust and eventually dislike US Authorities. If Assange is 'anti-american', he isn't anti the American people, he's anti American government, because of what they've done and for consistantly proving that they'll respect other countries and their rights as foreign sovereign territories, only so long as said countries treat US law as de-facto international law.

I do notice how you, never once, addressed the points I made.


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 7, 2010)

Carenath said:


> Tell that, to the various people the US has prosecuted-by-proxy, applying US Law on foreign soil, because those individuals managed to piss off people with power.
> 
> 
> Jon Johansen, was arrested and tried in Norway.. under pressure from the US.. for, apparently, breaking a US law (which obviously doesn't apply to foreign sovereign territories).
> ...


 


Tycho said:


> "Treason" is a buzzword for the media, it sounds  really sinister and makes people get all "*gasp* how dare he" over the  matter.  I mean, no one likes traitors, they get the lowest level of  hell in Dante's Inferno FFS.  Wanna make someone everyone else's worst  enemy? Call him "traitor".
> 
> Also, I heard that he just leaked a  bunch of sensitive information about sites that are strategically  important to the USA (RL sites, not websites). * He just painted  bullseyes on a lot of places and people could actually be hurt by this  leak.*  If he wasn't an enemy of the USA before he sure as hell is now.   Good job, Assange.  They'll probably never find your body.



Wikileaks just released locations of factories and companies that are vital to the U.S military and government. In his "vendetta" Against the U.S government, Assange doesn't care who gets hurt. Add to the fact that Tycho is right again when Assange put the lives of Australian troops at risk with these leaks as well. Australia may be able to charge him with treason against his own country.

Furthermore, all those "unlawful" arrests, I highly doubt you possible know the whole story. Secondly you act like the U.S is the only country that does this. Many countries have arested by "proxi" according to your words. Assange is anti-American not because he hates the U.S Government, but because he is willing to put innocent lives at risk because he has a beef with the government. Wikileaks is not a "source" of information. Its a gossip website that made itself look all pretty. 


Manning, the intelligence officer who downloaded these files, is a traitor according to U.S military law (and to me as well), Assange is an accomplice to espionage, and he will be charged with something. You cannot dress up what was done. It was wrong, plain and simple.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Wikileaks just released locations of factories and companies that are vital to the U.S military and government. In his "vendetta" Against the U.S government, Assange doesn't care who gets hurt. Add to the fact that Tycho is right again when Assange put the lives of Australian troops at risk with these leaks as well. Australia may be able to charge him with treason against his own country.
> 
> Furthermore, all those "unlawful" arrests, I highly doubt you possible know the whole story. Secondly you act like the U.S is the only country that does this. Many countries have arested by "proxi" according to your words. Assange is anti-American not because he hates the U.S Government, but because he is willing to put innocent lives at risk because he has a beef with the government. Wikileaks is not a "source" of information. Its a gossip website that made itself look all pretty.
> 
> ...


 
wrong how? can you explain to me how the fuck the american government has any right to pursue foreign nationals for violations of american law?

seriously... AMERICA IS NOT THE FUCKING WORLD you retard.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 7, 2010)

Redregon said:


> wrong how? can you explain to me how the fuck the american government has any right to pursue foreign nationals for violations of american law?
> 
> seriously... AMERICA IS NOT THE FUCKING WORLD you retard.


 
Rukh is your standard conservative fundiegelical American. Things like basic logic and truth don't apply to him. He's off in his own little fox-news fueled world.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> Rukh is your standard conservative fundiegelical American. Things like basic logic and truth don't apply to him. He's off in his own little fox-news fueled world.


 
too bad there isn't some prerequisite for being allowed to use the internet. things like a basic psych exam and intelligence test would seriously help curtail a lot of the bullshit.


----------



## Aden (Dec 7, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Wikileaks just released locations of factories and companies that are vital to the U.S military and government.


 
Shit! Now those damn terrorists will know where the Pentagon and Ford HQ are located.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 7, 2010)

Aden said:


> Shit! Now those damn terrorists will know where the Pentagon and Ford HQ are located.


 
If those were the only "sensitive locations" on that list I would be shocked.  Some of them might be obvious, but there are likely plenty of others which until now were not getting much if any attention of the wrong sort.

As for the pursuit and unlawful detainment (read: kidnapping, basically) of foreign nationals on charges of violating American laws/pissing off American corporations, no, I don't like that one bit.  It's an abuse of power, yes.  It's particularly reprehensible when committed at the behest of a private corporation, which has no business telling the US government to unlawfully detain a foreign national.  (At least not one that hasn't actually committed an act comparable to Assange's espionage/sabotage.  Assange is fair game IMO because he has effectively made himself an enemy informant and thus can be considered an enemy combatant and intel asset.  It's one thing to piss off MegaCorporation USA, it's another to sow seeds of strife amongst countries and provide potentially sensitive information to those who have expressed an active interest in harming US citizens and assets.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Aden said:


> Shit! Now those damn terrorists will know where the Pentagon and Ford HQ are located.


 
why worry about the terrorists blowing up the pentagon? the CIA will just do that for them anyway (though i'm sure they'll let them take the credit.)


----------



## Tycho (Dec 7, 2010)

Redregon said:


> why worry about the terrorists blowing up the pentagon? the CIA will just do that for them anyway (though i'm sure they'll let them take the credit.)


 
Fuck only knows what hit the Pentagon, if not a plane.  I've heard claims that it was a missile, but the amount of damage done looks like more than what a standard US air-to-ground/surface missile could manage.


----------



## CannonFodder (Dec 7, 2010)

The founder just got arrested.


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Dec 7, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> The founder just got arrested.


 
Turned himself in to British police, probably to face the charges head-on.  I'm still kinda confused about the supposed allegations.

Some women are upset with him because they had consensual, unprotected sex and are pissed he's not getting himself tested for STDs?  This case is confusing.


----------



## CannonFodder (Dec 7, 2010)

Term_the_Schmuck said:


> Turned himself in to British police, probably to face the charges head-on.  I'm still kinda confused about the supposed allegations.
> 
> Some women are upset with him because they had consensual, unprotected sex and are pissed he's not getting himself tested for STDs?  This case is confusing.


 They're coming up with bogus allegations to get him arrested.
It doesn't matter that it was consensual, and welcome to politics.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> They're coming up with bogus allegations to get him arrested.
> It doesn't matter that it was consensual, and welcome to politics.


 
welp, i've got my "insurance" file downloaded... do you? 

cause i've got $5 that he's going to be "whereabouts unknown" in a year or less.

.... wouldn't be the first time someone was killed for political reasons by the USA.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 7, 2010)

Redregon said:


> welp, i've got my "insurance" file downloaded... do you?
> 
> cause i've got $5 that he's going to be "whereabouts unknown" in a year or less.
> 
> .... wouldn't be the first time someone was killed for political reasons by the USA.


 
As long as the media circus persists he's probably safe.  There are enough people watching and enough people in the States who would rather have him ALIVE that I don't think he'll disappear.  The press in the UK and the US both are his REAL insurance policy.  He was going to eventually leak everything in that insurance file anyway and everyone knows it.  The ones most likely to off him would be the Arabs, the Russians and maybe the Israelis (did he step on their toes? I forget).


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Tycho said:


> As long as the media circus persists he's probably safe.  There are enough people watching and enough people in the States who would rather have him ALIVE that I don't think he'll disappear.  The press in the UK and the US both are his REAL insurance policy.  He was going to eventually leak everything in that insurance file anyway and everyone knows it.  The ones most likely to off him would be the Arabs, the Russians and maybe the Israelis (did he step on their toes? I forget).


 
i'm not so confidant, really... i mean... "Accidents" happen all the time.


----------



## DarkChaos (Dec 7, 2010)

Joe Lieberman wants the New York Times investigated over the leaks.
Lieberman really has had a lot to do with the government pressuring various pay-sites over WikiLeaks, and after this article, I would go so far as to say he is one of the biggest threats to freedom of the press right now.  Fuck Lieberman.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 7, 2010)

DarkChaos said:


> Joe Lieberman wants the New York Times investigated over the leaks.
> Lieberman really has had a lot to do with the government pressuring various pay-sites over WikiLeaks, and after this article, I would go so far as to say he is one of the biggest threats to freedom of the press right now.  Fuck Lieberman.


 
Lieberman's an annoying noisy little cocksucking bastard.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Lieberman's an annoying noisy little cocksucking bastard.


 
and of course he's trying to clamp down on all things wikileaks... any bets he'll be named directly in some of the most damning material released?

seriously, i really do hope that there's some really dirty laundry in all the information leaked... as in, proof of US Senators committing treason. it'll give the legal system a reason to hang the fuckers (it's still a capital offence to commit treason in the US, punishable by death, right?)


----------



## Tycho (Dec 7, 2010)

Redregon said:


> and of course he's trying to clamp down on all things wikileaks... any bets he'll be named directly in some of the most damning material released?



Don't know, don't care.  He's been a busybody and a pain in video gamers' asses for a while now.  Wish the old fart would just shuffle off the coil.



Redregon said:


> seriously, i really do hope that there's some really dirty laundry in all the information leaked... as in, proof of US Senators committing treason. it'll give the legal system a reason to hang the fuckers (it's still a capital offence to commit treason in the US, punishable by death, right?)


 
Unlikely.  And if all you're out for is some blood you really need to reevaluate your priorities here.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 7, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Unlikely.  And if all you're out for is some blood you really need to reevaluate your priorities here.


 
awwww... but i needses it!!!! ;_;


----------



## Aden (Dec 7, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Don't know, don't care.  He's been a busybody and a pain in video gamers' asses for a while now.  Wish the old fart would just shuffle off the coil.


 
The most annoying opportunist


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 8, 2010)

You know what's _really_ funny? At the same time that the US is attacking Wikileaks because it dared to commit an act of journalism and publish leaked US diplomatic cables showing the US's hypocrisy and deceit on the world stage...

...the United States Government is proudly announcing that it will host World Press Freedom Day in 2011. 

And for bonus irony points, the theme will be - wait for it - _"21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers."_


> New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individualsâ€™ right to freedom of expression. *At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments [read: Iran, China - Mayfurr] to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information.
> 
> We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age*...



... except for where that freedom of the press and "the free flow of information" might embarrass the US, it would appear. In those cases the US does an about face to "censor and silence individuals", just like a typical Third World tin-pot dictatorship.

I somehow doubt though that Assange will be nominated for the "UNESCO Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize", even though his recent history would qualify him on the basis of being _"a person, organization or institution that has notably contributed to the defence and/or promotion of press freedom, *especially where risks have been undertaken*"_.

"Irony can be a pretty ironic thing sometimes."


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

On the topic of the leak's.

I find it very hard to believe that some of you actually don't get giddy at the thought of Americans being killed or put in harm's way simply due to your own personal political opinions of the United States and it's people.

C'mon. you know you love to hate us/yourselves-ourselves.


----------



## DarkChaos (Dec 8, 2010)

I defy you to show me proof that these leaks have put/are putting any Americans in harm's way.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

DarkChaos said:


> I defy you to show me proof that these leaks have put/are putting any Americans in harm's way.


 
LOL.


----------



## Fay V (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> LOL.


 This post was helpful and informative


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Fay V said:


> This post was helpful and informative


 
Sorry, I couldn't help being amused at his hawkish response.

I'll say it anyway. The leaks disclosed sensitive individuals and places and actions that led to the deaths of Coalition/ISAF/NATO/EU members and Afghani/some Iraqi informants as well as members of their families, if not their entirety.

At this time, I don't know of any (large media) outlets with a handy webpage about casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan from the earlier "Wikileaks". Even simply one that would be accepted by FAF as credible; as anything published by the Government and/or military is under the consensus here that its piles of "Lies and Deceit". 

Even if there was some article on say CNN, BBC, REUTERS, I expect some here to point fingers and claim "lies, the government made them say it" or some rhetoric about it being Republican garbage or someone just pointing and calling me a fundamentalist/whatever. FAF isn't just cynical. It's deteriorated into the aggressive lashings out of internet social behavior. (see Lulz.net/4chan.org etc.)

The majority here find Julian of no wrong, and even go as far of claiming to him actually being a hero of free speech, transparency, and democracy to my great disdain. To add insult to injury the fact that I'm former service (Army) would make my contribution invalid on instant accusations of being brainwashed and/or racist against Arabs, or joined out of "9/11 flash patriotism" even though I went in around 1999. This is my long winded response with no acceptable "PROOF". All this has been said before. With this being the last week of school, crunching for Class Projects due, final exams, and assignments. I'm just in no mood to entertain the skepticism by a disgruntled furry of a different political stroke.


----------



## DarkChaos (Dec 8, 2010)

I was going to chastise you for indeed posting no proof, but I'm afraid I'm having trouble speaking after all those words you stuffed in my mouth.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

DarkChaos said:


> I was going to chastise you for indeed posting no proof, but I'm afraid I'm having trouble speaking after all those words you stuffed in my mouth.


 
Yeah, Sorry. Rough day. On the defense and been dealing with various assholes ever day for two weeks.
As for the origins of the word stuffing. They are common responses I've gotten and have grown accustomed to. I've grown habit to receiving them and refuting them in a routine.
Looking at it from different standpoint. Looking at myself,strongly believing that the leaks led to the deaths of Coalition members. One can understand where i would be quick to be snappy and angry at Julian/Manning. its a hot button issue. Being a (Ret.) Ssgt, its only natural for my blood to boil when "SHOW ME PROOF" comes up. Sharing the accounts of my friends over seas means nothing in this discussion.

But my earlier comment still stands. and its not directed _directly _at you.
"I find it very hard to believe that some of you actually don't get giddy at the thought of Americans being killed or put in harm's way simply due to your own personal political opinions of the United States and it's people"


----------



## Attaman (Dec 8, 2010)

First off, I don't think anyone minds leaks like this one.  Well, besides the US, which has been trying to keep a lid on this for a while.



MaverickCowboy said:


> On the topic of the leak's.
> 
> I find it very hard to believe that some of you actually don't get giddy at the thought of Americans being killed or put in harm's way simply due to your own personal political opinions of the United States and it's people.
> 
> C'mon. you know you love to hate us/yourselves-ourselves.



It's not like Wikileaks hasn't given several opportunities / taken any efforts to hide such information, by the way.  Site's a wee bit biased, but has some good points.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-us-russia-visa-mastercard

here's another leak... this one's pretty bad. thoughts?


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/12/wikileaks_texas_company_helped.php

aaaaand another one. (this one sickens me to no end.)


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-us-russia-visa-mastercard
> 
> here's another leak... this one's pretty bad. thoughts?


 


Redregon said:


> http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/12/wikileaks_texas_company_helped.php
> 
> aaaaand another one. (this one sickens me to no end.)


 
OK, these NEEDED to be leaked.  Fucking hell.  Indulging Afghan sickos, what the fucking hell.

God damn I can feel my pulse racing, I'm so fucking pissed right now.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> OK, these NEEDED to be leaked.  Fucking hell.  Indulging Afghan sickos, what the fucking hell.
> 
> God damn I can feel my pulse racing, I'm so fucking pissed right now.


 
Dude, don't forget information rule #3-
The stuff that's kept secret is the stuff people most need to know.

If this was stuff that wasn't at all incriminating the companies would have posted it themselves already to make themselves look better.


----------



## Azure (Dec 8, 2010)

I'm surprised more furries aren't DOWN with the whole bacha bazi thing, it sounds like their bag :V

Seriously though, none of this is surprising at all.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

Azure said:


> I'm surprised more furries aren't DOWN with the whole bacha bazi thing, it sounds like their bag :V
> 
> Seriously though, none of this is surprising at all.


 
A lot of the Middle East practices it, supposedly.

I swear I want to wipe the Middle East off the face of the planet right now.  The feeling will pass, but right now I wish we could glass the lot of them.

What's really COMPOUNDING my anger here is that DynCorp was pandering to these fuckheads.


----------



## Azure (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> A lot of the Middle East practices it, supposedly.
> 
> I swear I want to wipe the Middle East off the face of the planet right now. The feeling will pass, but right now I wish we could glass the lot of them.
> 
> What's really COMPOUNDING my anger here is that DynCorp was pandering to these fuckheads.


The whole bacha bazi thing is not as widespread as one thinks, the official customs are in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but that doesn't mean the rest of the Arab world doesn't indulge in homosexuality and pedophilia in it's own special ways. It's rather widespread, from what I've seen and experienced. Arabs are far more disgusting than the rest of the world ever gives them credit for. I've lived among them, and even as a younger man, I saw many hallmarks of it. And I'm also about 100% positive that DynCorp was probably greasing the wheel the only way they could. If the primo currency is 12 year old boy ass and a hookah full of opium and you'll do as we say, so be it said they, and I don't blame them one bit. Afghanis suck even more than Arabs.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> A lot of the Middle East practices it, supposedly.
> 
> I swear I want to wipe the Middle East off the face of the planet right now.  The feeling will pass, but right now I wish we could glass the lot of them.
> 
> What's really COMPOUNDING my anger here is that DynCorp was pandering to these fuckheads.



The best part is that this was, apparently, part of the information that would "endanger lives" if released.

this is that sort of matter of national security HOW?


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Dec 8, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> The best part is that this was, apparently, part of the information that would "endanger lives" if released.
> 
> this is that sort of matter of national security HOW?



You do realize they were talking about informants?


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> What's really COMPOUNDING my anger here is that DynCorp was pandering to these fuckheads.



... with your tax dollars too (if you're american.)

and if american tax dollars are going to these sorts of things (through private contractors working on behalf of the USA) then that makes me wonder what ELSE has been done with american citizens' money.


----------



## Mayfurr (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> I find it very hard to believe that some of you actually don't get giddy at the thought of Americans being killed or put in harm's way simply due to your own personal political opinions of the United States and it's people.


 
Oh typical. Anyone who doesn't suck up and otherwise brown-nose to the US Government in every way is automatically "anti-American" and "gets giddy at the thought of Americans being killed or put in harm's way". Never mind that it's been revealed that the US is doing very questionable stuff - if anyone is putting American lives at risk, it's the US government with its policies. 

And as far as this stuff putting Americans in harm's way:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...scure-what-wikileaks-has-told-us-2154109.html


> Most people in the US and Britain oppose these policies. We are better than our politicians. But we can only stop them â€“ and the risk they pose to innocent people across the world, including us â€“ if we know about them. Assange has made that possible, at great risk to his liberty and his life. So this is a move that enhances our national security. *Of course, there are people who claim he has â€œblood on his handsâ€ â€“ but where is there evidence? It is months now since the first cables were leaked, and they have found not a single person who has been even threatened as a result of the leaks â€“ except Assange*, whose death is being incited by many of Americaâ€™s leading politicians.
> 
> There is a squalid little irony when you see *people who are literally bombing innocent civilians every day feverishly accuse a man who has never touched a weapon in his life of being â€œcovered in blood.â€* Wikileaks have hurt nobody. They redacted sensitive names. They held back any cables that could expose anyone to risk. *They asked the Pentagon to help them by privately explaining where they believed there could be a danger â€“ only to be rebuffed. *(emphasis added)


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 8, 2010)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> You do realize they were talking about informants?


 
We are? Coulda fooled me. :V I thought we were talking about boys being raped and with official US diplomats covering it up by saying "This could endanger lives if released!" here. Which obviously casts doubt on just what of this information actually will endanger lives if released, or if that's simply an attempt to cover their asses...


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Dec 8, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> We are? Coulda fooled me. :V I thought we were talking about boys being raped and with official US diplomats covering it up by saying "This could endanger lives if released!" here. Which obviously casts doubt on just what of this information actually will endanger lives if released, or if that's simply an attempt to cover their asses...


 

I wasn't trying to start something. You weren't very clear. You brought up national security, which made me think you were referring to people within the United States. Because obviously, if leaks were made and informants were mentioned, yes, those lives would be endanger. So, there was no point in putting quotations marks around "endanger lives" if you were aware that the informants lives were in danger.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Dec 8, 2010)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> I wasn't trying to start something. You weren't very clear. You brought up national security, which made me think you were referring to people within the United States. Because obviously, if leaks were made and informants were mentioned, yes, those lives would be endanger. So, there was no point in putting quotations marks around "endanger lives" if you were aware that the informants lives were in danger.


 
Alright, sorry. Mostly I'm just outraged that people would use try to make this sort of thing seem like a matter of national security that it is kept secret.


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Dec 8, 2010)

Mojotech said:


> Alright, sorry. Mostly I'm just outraged that people would use try to make this sort of thing seem like a matter of national security that it is kept secret.


 
It's alright.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> You do realize they were talking about informants?


 
there is something to consider here... assuming those informants aren't american, all they really have to do is cut ties with their current informants (and maybe provide them with safety... such as the witless protection program and bring them to america) and get new ones... there... problem solved. still have informants but they're now unknown again.

i mean, think about it... how many people in taliban and al quaida controlled countries probably aren't all fans of those two regimes so there's very likely going to be someone willing to talk to the american forces about them for a little scratch (which, given the level of poverty and value of the american dollar over there probably be quite a nice chunk of change.)

though i'm not a military type nor am i a diplomat so i'm just throwing that up there in potential ignorance.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Mayfurr said:


> Oh typical. Anyone who doesn't suck up and otherwise brown-nose to the US Government in every way is automatically "anti-American" and "gets giddy at the thought of Americans being killed or put in harm's way". Never mind that it's been revealed that the US is doing very questionable stuff - if anyone is putting American lives at risk, it's the US government with its policies.
> 
> And as far as this stuff putting Americans in harm's way:
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...scure-what-wikileaks-has-told-us-2154109.html






WOW, you took a simple statement into a "With us or against us statement" CONGRATS bro.  quit being so high strung seriosuly.



T


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> there is something to consider here... assuming those informants aren't american, all they really have to do is cut ties with their current informants (and maybe provide them with safety... such as the witless protection program and bring them to america) and get new ones... there... problem solved. still have informants but they're now unknown again.
> 
> though i'm not a military type nor am i a diplomat so i'm just throwing that up there in potential ignorance.


 
There's little of them. You cant find new ones because most people are too intimidated by the Taliban to help the U.S./Coalition. They usually live in villages/have families and are very much integrated with current events or know some members of the taliban personally. Once those got compromised, they were pretty much fucked. Most of them already got killed and turned into a giant fucking mess.


----------



## Willow (Dec 8, 2010)

I dunno what all has been discussed by I just read not too long ago, but according to a post I read this morning on Facebook, The Principality of Sealand has been asked to give Julian Assange a passport. 

And the whole rape thing was false apparently.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Willow said:


> I dunno what all has been discussed by I just read not too long ago, but according to a post I read this morning on Facebook, The Principality of Sealand has been asked to give Julian Assange a passport.
> 
> And the whole rape thing was false apparently.


 
The charges arn't rape.


----------



## Willow (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> The charges arn't rape.


It had something to do with sexual assault from what I heard.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

Willow said:


> It had something to do with sexual assault from what I heard.


 
No, it was about Assange being a dickhead to two women he had screwed without protection.  They demanded he get tested for STDs, he refused or something.  That's against the law in Sweden.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

Willow said:


> It had something to do with sexual assault from what I heard.


 
it was having sex without a condom (from what i've been able to tell...) no idea why that's a crime but w/e... those wacky swedes ;D


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> it was having sex without a condom (from what i've been able to tell...) no idea why that's a crime but w/e... those wacky swedes ;D


 
Forget the swedes, have you seen his fans? They're freaking the fuck out, pulling their hair out screaming U.S. CIA ops. its lol worthy.


----------



## Willow (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> No, it was about Assange being a dickhead to two women he had screwed without protection.  They demanded he get tested for STDs, he refused or something.  That's against the law in Sweden.


 


Redregon said:


> it was having sex without a condom (from what i've been able to tell...) no idea why that's a crime but w/e... those wacky swedes ;D


 Ah okay. I blame the news then. They said it was sexual assault. Either way, it was false right?


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Willow said:


> Either way, it was false right?


 
Nope. Eitherway, hes using this to his advantage. He's going to be a political martyr for Wikileaks.


----------



## Aden (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> No, it was about Assange being a dickhead to two women he had screwed without protection.  They demanded he get tested for STDs, he refused or something.  That's against the law in Sweden.


 
He didn't force them to screw him.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

Aden said:


> He didn't force them to screw him.


 
I didn't say he did, I said he was a dickhead because he refused to get tested.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Aden said:


> He didn't force them to screw him.


 
No you don't understand.

they demanded he get tested for STDs, (AFTER the fact of unprotected sex) he *refused* and  *That's against the law in Sweden.*


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> Forget the swedes, have you seen his fans? They're freaking the fuck out, pulling their hair out screaming U.S. CIA ops. its lol worthy.


 
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/world/09wiki.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp

that and apparently Anonymous has launched cyberattacks against Mastercard, Visa and all the other people that tried to silence Wikileaks.

shit, dog, this just got real.


----------



## Lapdog (Dec 8, 2010)

No, but seriously, I understand why some governments are angry. I wouldn't want my secrets on the internet.

Hey, wanna hear a secret? WELL YOU DON'T GET ONE!


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/world/09wiki.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp
> 
> that and apparently Anonymous has launched cyberattacks against Mastercard, Visa and all the other people that tried to silence Wikileaks.
> 
> shit, dog, this just got real.



Fucking 4channers.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Dec 8, 2010)

surprise sex


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> Awesome 4channers.


 
Fixed that for ya!


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

May





ElizabethAlexandraMary said:


> surprise sex


 
May i buy the Queen a drink? I wish to court thee.

You're wrinkles and flapping veejayjay are so utterly irsistable.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> Fixed that for ya!


 
NO.

STOP IT. STOP IT RIGHT NOW /B/.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> May
> 
> May i buy the Queen a drink? I wish to court thee.
> 
> You're wrinkles and flapping veejayjay are so utterly irsistable.



you... like that kinda grilled cheese?



MaverickCowboy said:


> NO.
> 
> STOP IT. STOP IT RIGHT NOW /B/.


 
no. *coolface.jpg*


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> you... like that kinda grilled cheese?
> 
> 
> 
> no. *coolface.jpg*


 


Its only grilled when I'm done with it.

*Ding*            -Speaking of which..



Yes. you will stop it. Or i shall bring out the box of cocks and duel you to the death.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> Yes. you will stop it. Or i shall bring out the box of cocks and duel you to the death.


 
oh really? you want to make this into an official fag-battle then? engarde! (whips out Thor.)


----------



## Aden (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> they demanded he get tested for STDs, (AFTER the fact of unprotected sex)


 
Oh, for some reason I was under the impression that it was beforehand

and why the fuck are they worrying about it afterwards? That's _exactly the kind of shit you shoud find out beforehand_.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Aden said:


> Oh, for some reason I was under the impression that it was beforehand
> 
> and why the fuck are they worrying about it afterwards? That's _exactly the kind of shit you shoud find out beforehand_.


 

No, he was being a dick.

"Mr. Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, was jailed in Britain on Tuesday after being denied bail in a London court hearing on a warrant for his extradition to Sweden to face accusations of sexual offenses. His accusers have said that consensual encounters became nonconsensual when condoms were no longer in use"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/world/09wiki.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> oh really? you want to make this into an official fag-battle then? engarde! (whips out Thor.)


 
(Crams my wolf cock into your eyesocket)

i win.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> (Crams my wolf cock into your eyesocket)
> 
> i win.


 
hahahah, you lose! i have no eyes! *exits stage left into a wall*


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

Aden said:


> Oh, for some reason I was under the impression that it was beforehand
> 
> and why the fuck are they worrying about it afterwards? That's _exactly the kind of shit you shoud find out beforehand_.


 
Well, in one of the cases it was a matter of a broken condom.  The other is alleging he sexed her up while she was sleeping (damn, he must be a bad lay) if I'm reading all this correctly.  Apparently neither one had reason to demand testing until after the fact.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> hahahah, you lose! i have no eyes! *exits stage left into a wall*


 

OMG lol.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

Will you two fags shut up and get a room already? God damn.  Can't have conversations on a furry forum without someone smutting the whole thing up.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Will you two fags shut up and get a room already? God damn.  Can't have conversations on a furry forum without someone smutting the whole thing up.


 


FURSECUTION, the damn breeders are tryin to silence me cuz im gay!

but naw. its done now.

"Mr. Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, was jailed in Britain on Tuesday after being denied bail in a London court hearing on a warrant for his extradition to Sweden to face accusations of sexual offenses. His accusers have said that consensual encounters became nonconsensual when condoms were no longer in use"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/world/09wiki.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp

Trying to find the guy who posted this link. brb, fetching to edit.


----------



## Attaman (Dec 8, 2010)

The thing is, it's pretty damn obvious that the act was at least consensual enough that they felt like bragging about it (and, in at least one girl's case, holding a party).

Seriously, the fucks sent around tweets, phone messages, and so-on about how awesome it was to have slept with Assange, and one of them even went so far as to consider / have a party.  There's a reason they tried to drop the case three times, after all, and that's because anyone with half a brain (see:  Jury's probably not going to include anyone who has heard about the circumstance beyond "Assange raped children in Sweden") is going to go "Yeah, these charges are BS."  

One of the reasons I find it probably the day in court's going to repeatably be delayed.  It's practically a foregone conclusion right now that it'll either be a Kangaroo court, or they'll have to find new charges to stick to him.  Buying time keeps him out of their hair, as well as buying time to either get the current charges to stick.  Just letting him go, or only letting him stick with one or two "crimes" isn't going to be enough if they want to make an example against this "enemy", even if they put the maximum fines and penalties for the convicted crimes in effect.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/12/08/wikileaks.poison.pill/index.html?hpt=C1

'Julian is saying 'I've calibrated this so that no matter how many ways you try, you're never going to be able to deactivate it.'

this is getting rediculous.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 8, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/12/08/wikileaks.poison.pill/index.html?hpt=C1
> 
> 'Julian is saying 'I've calibrated this so that no matter how many ways you try, you're never going to be able to deactivate it.'
> 
> this is getting rediculous.


 
agreed... though, personally i think the most rediculous thing that's going on is that the governments are after assange himself when it's already established that he's just the front-man... if he goes down, there are more that will take his place and the whole wikileaks organization would be quite able to continue without him.

i would bet though that he's probably the "pretty face and smooth talker" out of all those involved with wikileaks. 

so, i think it's incredibly silly for the governments to be doing the shit they're doing. best bet for them? take it and do damage control. trying to shut him up (or even trying to shut up wikileaks) is fruitless at best given what's been done so far (insurance file, mirrors, anon's involvement and wikileaks not being a one-man show.)


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Redregon said:


> agreed... though, personally i think the most rediculous thing that's going on is that the governments are after assange himself when it's already established that he's just the front-man... if he goes down, there are more that will take his place and the whole wikileaks organization would be quite able to continue without him.
> 
> i would bet though that he's probably the "pretty face and smooth talker" out of all those involved with wikileaks.
> 
> so, i think it's incredibly silly for the governments to be doing the shit they're doing. best bet for them? take it and do damage control. trying to shut him up (or even trying to shut up wikileaks) is fruitless at best given what's been done so far (insurance file, mirrors, anon's involvement and wikileaks not being a one-man show.)


 
I wish they'd all vanish.

InB4 I'm a facist.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 8, 2010)

about now the only thing I want to/need to know is if Assange/WikiLeaks are going to hurt me or my family in any way, shape or form.

Because if so I will buy a ticket to Britain and kidnap the son of a bitch, beat him bloody and lock him in a dark basement for a bit until I drag him out, beat him bloody again and throw him back in.  This cycle will repeat (hopefully many times) until he dies, broken in body, mind and spirit.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> about now the only thing I want to/need to know is if Assange/WikiLeaks are going to hurt me or my family in any way, shape or form.
> 
> Because if so I will buy a ticket to Britain and kidnap the son of a bitch, beat him bloody and lock him in a dark basement for a bit until I drag him out, beat him bloody again and throw him back in.  This cycle will repeat (hopefully many times) until he dies, broken in body, mind and spirit.


 
I will join you.


----------



## Aden (Dec 8, 2010)

I kind of want him to get locked up so I can finally see what's in that damn file


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 9, 2010)

Aden said:


> I kind of want him to get locked up so I can finally see what's in that damn file


 

I know rite?

Also, i want to touch his pretty face.

with a knife. a really big knife.


----------



## CannonFodder (Dec 9, 2010)

Anon is now defending him, and going after mastercard and that.
If you are anon, I'd give you a high five for that.


----------



## Carenath (Dec 9, 2010)

Assange is starting to look more and more like Will Smith's character in Enemy of the State :/


----------



## Attaman (Dec 9, 2010)

http://rixstep.com/1/20100823,00.shtml

"Seven Steps to Legal Revenge

Ardin is known to have been infatuated with (and have translated) the infamous 'Seven Steps to Legal Revenge' which details how to inflict pain on enemies by getting people to stalk them and by using other nefarious tricks. Ardin ardently believes the patriarchal aspect of Western society is only held in place by the male's ability to rape women."

Prosecution looks to have a better and better case by the minute.

Oh, and before someone just says "She worked on it so what?"  From another source now:

"On her now deleted wordpress blog, Anna Ardin has a piece on revenge:

'One reason for revenge

Iâ€™ve been thinking about some revenge over the last few days and came across a very good side who inspired me to this seven-point revenge instruction in Swedish.'"


----------



## Fay V (Dec 9, 2010)

Carenath said:


> Assange is starting to look more and more like Will Smith's character in Enemy of the State :/


 life imitates art? 


I just realized how horrific that is to say on a furry forum


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Dec 9, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Will you two fags shut up and get a room already? God damn.  Can't have conversations on a furry forum without someone smutting the whole thing up.


Nonconstructive thread derailment, you can actually report that shit.



MaverickCowboy said:


> I know rite?
> 
> Also, i want to touch his pretty face.
> 
> with a knife. a really big knife.


i hope the fbi vans you for this


----------



## Tycho (Dec 9, 2010)

Attaman said:


> http://rixstep.com/1/20100823,00.shtml
> 
> "Seven Steps to Legal Revenge
> 
> ...


 
...Oh wow, she's fucking NUTS.  Assange picked a real winner right there.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 9, 2010)

ElizabethAlexandraMary said:


> i hope the fbi vans you for this


 
More people to play with! YAY


----------



## Carenath (Dec 9, 2010)

It's ridiculously petty of all of you, baying for his blood right now. A level of hypocrisy and immaturity I've come to expect from people (and furries by extension) in general (and one might wonder why I proudly point out my cynical nature and justified misanthropy).

To quote someone, smarter than I am "you're all morons".


----------



## Tycho (Dec 9, 2010)

Carenath said:


> It's ridiculously petty of all of you, baying for his blood right now. A level of hypocrisy and immaturity I've come to expect from people (and furries by extension) in general (and one might wonder why I proudly point out my cynical nature and justified misanthropy).
> 
> To quote someone, smarter than I am "you're all morons".


 
Well, excUUUUuuuuse me.  If Assange/WikiLeaks shits on me you better goddamn well believe I'm going to be pissed.  If my life becomes harder because a guy who IS bent against the US government (and likely doesn't give two shits about the "little guys" like me or any of the Americans who are CHEERING HIM ON for that matter) releases something that makes the country and government I'm forced to deal with every fucking day as a citizen of the USA shit a fucking brick right onto my (and my family's and friends' and so on...) fucking head I reserve the basic human right to be really fucking angry.

Shit, you're not American, are you? You're Irish.  You don't give a hill of beans.  Fuck you, then.


----------



## jeff (Dec 9, 2010)

Tycho at 18thousand posts i think its been proven that all the people youre forced to deal with are basically cartoon characters drawn on the side of a box


----------



## Tycho (Dec 9, 2010)

Shartblaster said:


> Tycho at 18thousand posts i think its been proven that all the people youre forced to deal with are basically cartoon characters drawn on the side of a box


 
Nice.  Love you bunches too.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Dec 9, 2010)

well let's see it that way
it's just an extension of the whole "let's scare people with terrorism so we can control them better" bullshit, only i'm not sure why they even bother finding excuses to tighten "security" since everyone sees right through that (yet does fuck all)
is releasing info in that way a necessary evil, i don't fucking know, although the US reaction to this event in itself is probably more important that most of the cables


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 9, 2010)

Assange is a computer hacker, nothing more. He has no grounds for claiming the moral road. Add to the fact that his supporters and fellow hackers took down Visa and MasterCard's websites for awhile. Surprised nobody on here mentioned that.


----------



## Aden (Dec 9, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Assange is a computer hacker, nothing more.


 
actually he's uh
not


----------



## Rukh_Whitefang (Dec 9, 2010)

Aden said:


> actually he's uh
> not


 
He is a computer hacker. Thats all.


----------



## Aden (Dec 9, 2010)

Rukh_Whitefang said:


> He is a computer hacker. Thats all.


 
oh okay
what did he "hack"


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Dec 10, 2010)

Aden said:


> oh okay
> what did he "hack"


 
He _is_ a self proclaimed hacker /computer guy. But hes not hacked for 'wikileaks' at all. so. technically. He's not a hacker for wikileaks. Hes just a spokesperson.


----------



## Aden (Dec 10, 2010)

MaverickCowboy said:


> He _is_ a self proclaimed hacker /computer guy. But hes not hacked for 'wikileaks' at all. so. technically. He's not a hacker for wikileaks. Hes just a spokesperson.


 
Yeah, I'm just going by his quote



> Assange later commented, "It's a bit annoying, actually. Because I cowrote a book about [being a hacker], there are documentaries about that, people talk about that a lot. They can cut and paste. But that was 20 years ago. It's very annoying to see modern day articles calling me a computer hacker. I'm not ashamed of it, I'm quite proud of it. But I understand the reason they suggest I'm a computer hacker now. There's a very specific reason."


----------



## Carenath (Dec 10, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Well, excUUUUuuuuse me.  If Assange/WikiLeaks shits on me you better goddamn well believe I'm going to be pissed.  If my life becomes harder because a guy who IS bent against the US government (and likely doesn't give two shits about the "little guys" like me or any of the Americans who are CHEERING HIM ON for that matter) releases something that makes the country and government I'm forced to deal with every fucking day as a citizen of the USA shit a fucking brick right onto my (and my family's and friends' and so on...) fucking head I reserve the basic human right to be really fucking angry.
> 
> Shit, you're not American, are you? You're Irish.  You don't give a hill of beans.  Fuck you, then.


Exactly how, has Assange/Wikileaks, shat on you?
Exactly how, has it made the US and it's government shit a proverbial brick on you personally and your families friends?

All I see is rhetoric and bluster from the US, who got rightly stung by the leakage of rather embarrassing information, that highlights illegal and morally dubious actions on a much more wider scale than what the US has done in the past at the behest of it's corporation's interests, which earned it the ire of thousands of computer users worldwide.

My nationality is irrelevant, I'm neutral in respect to any countries national interests. I'm also not anti-american, I never have been.
I have stated, more than once now, that I *do not* condone the leaks that *put lives in danger*. That said, I don't automatically side with the US on their unproven statement to that effect, to my knowledge, no one has died or been killed as a result of these leaks.

At least you understood the point I had been trying to make, about the questionable and illegal actions taken against foreign citizens by US agents or by proxy. Where no local laws had been violated and in the case of the German, mistaken identity. You agreed with me as I recall, that such actions are detestable.

All I'm saying is that, baying for a mans blood, when no harm has been done, that you can prove, to you personally, makes you sound like a rampant angry moron, angry for the sake of being angry or belated national patriotism.



Rukh_Whitefang said:


> Assange is a computer hacker, nothing more. He has no grounds for claiming the moral road. Add to the fact that his supporters and fellow hackers took down Visa and MasterCard's websites for awhile. Surprised nobody on here mentioned that.


 The fact that anyone can claim to be a hacker, makes these kind of statements laughable. Being a computer hacker, is not immoral, if you knew anything at all about computer hacking, and the types of people that execute such moves, you'd know that.

Anonymous, didn't hack MasterCard or Visa's websites, they hit them with a distributed denial of service attack. They've hit sites unrelated to Wikileaks prior to all this too bringing them under watch from the FBI.



MaverickCowboy said:


> He _is_ a self proclaimed hacker /computer guy.


 So do a lot of "hackers", particularly given how that word is misused, which is why such claims should be taken with a pinch of salt.


----------



## Tycho (Dec 10, 2010)

Carenath said:


> Exactly how, has Assange/Wikileaks, shat on you?
> Exactly how, has it made the US and it's government shit a proverbial brick on you personally and your families friends?



He/they HAVEN'T, YET.  I was expressing that I would be extraordinarily angry if they DID, which at this point I have a sneaking suspicion that they WILL somehow.  Assange wants to shake the US Gov't up and I very seriously doubt he'll ever stop for a second to think "Could this screw up a lot of innocents' lives?" before leaking something (I'm guessing probably because he would be mentally incapable of putting "American" and "innocent" in the same sentence).  Whether sensitive names get actually redacted (did the names of those Afghan operatives get redacted? Not from everything I've heard) will be ANYONE'S guess, as I doubt that it bothers Assange (who is a bona fide megalomaniac) or WikiLeaks whether any soldier, diplomat, undercover operative or civilian gets killed - I'm sure they'd just lay the blame at the feet of the US while chiding them with statements amounting to "If you hadn't been naughty this wouldn't have happened! Tsk! Tsk!".

His next target (so he says) will be Bank of America.  I have no love for BoA but if they fell-down-went-boom because of a leak they're not the only ones who are going to suffer.  BoA is HUGE, and is a big player in the US economy.  If they were to be devastated by a leak you bet your ass they'd take other people down with them, intentionally or unintentionally.  I very seriously doubt Assange or WikiLeaks will exercise any real discretion - at this point I would think that they would REALLY try for the jugular, in the face of the recent blows to their finance and hosting and Assange's capture and subsequent prosecution (and possibly extradition).


----------



## Attaman (Dec 10, 2010)

Rukh:  By the same token, in regard to the "hack" bit, do you feel Sarah Palin should be tried?  Or Glen Beck?  After all, you could much more readily argue that they incited (EDIT)attacks than Assange (unless you could kindly provide some unbiased, cited sources to me that show that Assange has told people to specifically hack those sites).  The two I provided examples for have an entire _base_ working around "Well we told people to stand up for themselves against the oppressive evil [insert target here], but we never _directly_ told them to go after the people we put on a map with crosshairs over their homes and labeled them "targets" in."  The Assange hacks, to my understanding, were done without any input or request from Assange at all.

You can use them against Wikileaks in terms of who's supporting it, but you can't use that against Assange unless you want to argue for a _lot_ of political and televised figures to be tried for similar reasons.


----------



## 8-bit (Dec 10, 2010)

Is wikileaks legal? If so, then I'm totally fine with it.


I heard annon "attacked" Visa and Mastercard for not allowing people to use their cards to donate to wikileaks.


----------



## Attaman (Dec 10, 2010)

8-bit said:


> Is wikileaks legal? If so, then I'm totally fine with it.
> 
> 
> I heard annon "attacked" Visa and Mastercard for not allowing people to use their cards to donate to wikileaks.


 Yes, it was Anon, but that doesn't mean people don't want Assange held responsible.


----------



## Kawaburd (Dec 10, 2010)

Ya know, no matter the outcome, this is worth it just to see paypal basically getting its tush stomped by /b/.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Dec 11, 2010)

I thought about writing a long reply but whatever I would have said has probably already been said. I support Wikileaks and think it is doing a good thing in promoting government transparency.


----------



## Bambi (Dec 11, 2010)

Summercat said:


> When it starts being neutral rather than apparently targeted for maximum political damage to an opposing ideology, then I'll like it.


Yep.

Of course, you're never going to see things like this become bipartisan.


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Dec 12, 2010)

8-bit said:


> Is wikileaks legal? If so, then I'm totally fine with it.


 
What do you mean by "legal"?  Do you mean is it legal for them to host the documents or do you mean is it legal how they got the documents?

In either case, yes it's legal.  I'm fairly sure Wikileaks constitutes as a news organization in media terms.  Therefore what they're posting is newsworthy and they're just doing what we'd expect any news agency that gets its hands on a bit of news to do with it, make it public.  And since I doubt anyone can really make a compelling argument saying that the American public/GIs are now officially worse off now that this information has been published, this information, in America at least, is protected under the First Amendment's freedom of the press clause.

How they got the documents is also legal, as it appears since they didn't explicitly commission anyone to get them the information, it was simply handed to them.  If indeed they had no role in the obtaining of the documents then they can by all means they have a right to publish the information.


----------



## Bambi (Dec 12, 2010)

Term_the_Schmuck said:


> What do you mean by "legal"?  Do you mean is it legal for them to host the documents or do you mean is it legal how they got the documents?
> 
> In either case, yes it's legal.  I'm fairly sure Wikileaks constitutes as a news organization in media terms.  Therefore what they're posting is newsworthy and they're just doing what we'd expect any news agency that gets its hands on a bit of news to do with it, make it public.  And since I doubt anyone can really make a compelling argument saying that the American public/GIs are now officially worse off now that this information has been published, this information, in America at least, is protected under the First Amendment's freedom of the press clause.
> 
> How they got the documents is also legal, as it appears since they didn't explicitly commission anyone to get them the information, it was simply handed to them.  If indeed they had no role in the obtaining of the documents then they can by all means they have a right to publish the information.


Except than we'd be ignoring the role Julian Assange had in manipulating PFC Manning, as well as the present nature of wiki-leaks itself.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 12, 2010)

Bambi said:


> Except than we'd be ignoring the role Julian Assange had in manipulating PFC Manning, as well as the present nature of wiki-leaks itself.


 
show us where it states that Bradly Manning was manipulated by Assange.


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Dec 12, 2010)

Bambi said:


> Except than we'd be ignoring the role Julian Assange had in manipulating PFC Manning, as well as the present nature of wiki-leaks itself.


 
I'm also unaware of any foul play going on with Manning releasing that info to wikileaks.


----------



## Bobskunk (Dec 12, 2010)

Wikileaks is right most of you dopes are wrong (especially Rukh) I'm still the best poster and admins here are too wussy to permanently ban me

this thread can be closed now


----------



## Xenke (Dec 12, 2010)

Bobskunk said:


> Wikileaks is right most of you dopes are wrong (especially Rukh) I'm still the best poster and admins here are too wussy to permanently ban me
> 
> this thread can be closed now


 
The fuck, it's a ghost.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Dec 12, 2010)

Bobskunk said:


> Wikileaks is right most of you dopes are wrong (especially Rukh) *I'm still the best poster and admins here are too wussy to permanently ban me
> 
> this thread can be closed now*


Either this is known or we don't really care anymore

Wikileaks is a source of good information to curious people who don't want usa


----------



## Bobskunk (Dec 12, 2010)

CynicalCirno said:


> ... Wikileaks is a source of good information to curious people who don't want usa


 
Please explain what this is supposed to mean


----------



## Tycho (Dec 12, 2010)

Bobskunk said:


> Please explain what this is supposed to mean


 
Holy shit he's back, and just in time for the WikiLeaks fuss.


----------



## Bambi (Dec 12, 2010)

Redregon said:


> show us where it states that Bradly Manning was manipulated by Assange.


Sure.

[1]PFC Manning, Early Struggles
[2]PFC Manning, Struggles II

Assange and his coterie may have done somethings right, but the motivations behind those actions were more political than ethical, and more about personal recognition and vanity than truth. We're all the ones clamoring out about the good such released documents could do, but in that arrogance, we're also ignoring that the real goal behind the releases was to affect our national policy such to the effect of embarrassing us out of Iraq (even though we were already in the process of leaving.) 

PFC Manning was in fact manipulated by these people, and they also worked to inspire in him this idea that the more he pushed, the more he would be noticed. There's also his personal struggles as well that he ignored, which in effect, made the perfect storm.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 12, 2010)

Bambi said:


> Sure.
> 
> [1]PFC Manning, Early Struggles
> [2]PFC Manning, Struggles II
> ...


 
okay, thanks for the links.

i will say this, though... as uncouth as it is for them to do what they did to him, that doesn't erase what's been revealed to have happened in the documents leaked. yeah, it may have been obtained unethically, but what's done is done. 

i kinda feel bad for Manning now. being queer in an institution like that? having shit fall apart and being tossed in the hoosegow (for being an idiot and unburdening himself which ended up implicating himself) he has got to have some serious issues. hope he gets the help he needs.


----------



## Bambi (Dec 12, 2010)

Redregon said:


> okay, thanks for the links.
> 
> i will say this, though... as uncouth as it is for them to do what they did to him, that doesn't erase what's been revealed to have happened in the documents leaked. yeah, it may have been obtained unethically, but what's done is done.


I'm not sure you understand what's going on in that _PFC Manning runs the risk of being executed._ "What's done is done", what's been done is this man was led to believe in his own will to be validated just to make Assange more popular and the penalty of that could be high treason. I'm not sure if the people following Assange get it yet, but Assange used Manning -- which means the truth be damned, Assange didn't care for it, he only cared for his character. Which is what's bothering me.

You know, and here we have a wealth of data that covers atrocities, small-arms skirmishes, and e-mails from our overseas diplomats, and the only thing of any real value wasn't the opinion of our diplomats, wasn't the reports filed from combative actions, but atrocities, bribes, and secret military action that could have been disclosed to the public and argued successfully, and even punished had power been honest. So, there were a few necessary sacrifices, and I believe the people willing to bring that to light deserve medals, not death. Yet on the other hand, everything else, every other major controversy is not that controversial, but was picked to enhance the negative effect "any" leak would've had for our government. 

Who cares if our ambassador to Jordan thinks the people there stink, because it doesn't stop him from doing his job. Heck, I think where at the place I work, some of the customers that come into our store are naive, but I'm not going out of my way to make them feel uncomfortable, and I don't treat them that way, and my believes of course don't stop me from doing my service appropriately. Everyone and their dog has been prompted that Al-Qaeda has "offices" in Africa, so it's not like we wouldn't support air strikes, because we did that with Clinton during 1994. I guess that's what I don't understand power, and the power Assange and Manning thought they could wield without responsibility.

Although, I will say thank you for reading my links and seeing what they were about, because than that means were both on the same page in terms of what we've read, maybe not what we believe, but that still brings us closer to some mutual understanding.


----------



## Redregon (Dec 12, 2010)

Bambi said:


> I'm not sure you understand what's going on in that _PFC Manning runs the risk of being executed._ "What's done is done", what's been done is this man was led to believe in his own will to be validated just to make Assange more popular and the penalty of that could be high treason. I'm not sure if the people following Assange get it yet, but Assange used Manning -- which means the truth be damned, Assange didn't care for it, he only cared for his character. Which is what's bothering me.
> 
> You know, and here we have a wealth of data that covers atrocities, small-arms skirmishes, and e-mails from our overseas diplomats, and the only thing of any real value wasn't the opinion of our diplomats, wasn't the reports filed from combative actions, but atrocities, bribes, and secret military action that could have been disclosed to the public and argued successfully, and even punished had power been honest. So, there were a few necessary sacrifices, and I believe the people willing to bring that to light deserve medals, not death. Yet on the other hand, everything else, every other major controversy is not that controversial, but was picked to enhance the negative effect "any" leak would've had for our government.
> 
> ...


 
fair enough, though, i was under the impression that Manning was only facing life (or, 52 years) in prison? yeah, he DID perpetrate a crime and yes, it does look like he was goaded into doing it, but if he were to face execution, chances are there'd be an overwhelming level of protest and maybe even worse. yeah, the US administration was caught with it's pants down, but i seriously hope that they're not so stupid as to provoke billions of people like that. it'd make him a martyr overnight and we both know how the world LOVES it's martyrs.


----------



## Bambi (Dec 12, 2010)

Redregon said:


> fair enough, though, i was under the impression that Manning was only facing life (or, 52 years) in prison? yeah, he DID perpetrate a crime and yes, it does look like he was goaded into doing it, but if he were to face execution, chances are there'd be an overwhelming level of protest and maybe even worse. yeah, the US administration was caught with it's pants down, but i seriously hope that they're not so stupid as to provoke billions of people like that. it'd make him a martyr overnight and we both know how the world LOVES it's martyrs.


Muahahahaha, yes, that they do.

I just wanted to put it out there that Assange and Manning were both rather interesting characters, and are not by any measure the heroes some of their most elite sycophants are making them out to be. Although, still, I have to say props for getting that war crime information out there.


----------

