backtop

Print 161 comment(s) - last by Smilin.. on Dec 7 at 9:39 AM

Wikileaks, a cyberespionage organization who primarily targets the U.S., was dumped from its host, Amazon, earlier this week.  (Source: AFP)

The U.S. government is trying to take steps to ensure that disgruntled employees don't leak confidential documents to information terrorist organization, like Wikileaks, in the future.  (Source: The York Blog)
Wikileaks accuses Amazon of violating free speech

As reported earlier this week, following its leak of 250,000 classified U.S. State Department diplomatic cables, Wikileaks was targeted by a distributed denial of service attack.  The site, which had been hosted primarily on Swedish hosting service Bahnhof, went down for a while on Sunday following the leak.

By Monday it was back up again.  According to details newly released from the site, its restoration came as it switched to Amazon's EC2 cloud computing platform, a service that allows users to rent as many virtual servers as they want.

Wikileaks Gets Dumped

The bad news for Wikileaks is that Amazon apparently dumped it sometime yesterday.

Wikileaks posted on Twitter:

WikiLeaks servers at Amazon ousted. Free speech the land of the free--fine our $ are now spent to employ people in Europe.

And then...

If Amazon are so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books.

The quote represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the first amendment, which is perhaps understandable given that the Wikileaks folks by and large aren't from the U.S.  The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevent the government from infringing on your free speech, but it's perfectly legal in the U.S. for businesses to kick you out and deny you access to their property if they don't like what you're saying.

According to The Seattle Times, Amazon was contacted by a Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee official who pressured the company to dump the site.  Much as it might have agreed to ditch an Al Qaeda site, Amazon agreed to dump Wikileaks, a site whose primary focus over the last several years has been against the U.S. government.

Moved back to Bahnhof, Wikileaks appears to be up and responsive at the present.

Government Beefs up Security

U.S. President Barack Obama has set up a special panel to assess the fallout of the leaked cables and determine steps to secure confidential government data better in the future.  The embarrassing deluge of private diplomatic observations of the government has convinced many that some sort of shake up is necessary.

The relative insecurity of classified government data is largely a result of post-9/11 efforts to share more information between various intelligence and defense agencies.  That effort resulted in low level military analysts having access to a wealth of confidential information.  One such analyst, a disgruntled soldier name Bradley Manning, was responsible for the recent leaks to Wikileaks, a move he made after he was demoted.

One problem, though, is that officials can't seem to agree on how to enhance security.  The National Counterintelligence Executive, part of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the most senior U.S. intelligence official was going to set up teams of inspectors to assess each agency's security policies.  However, the U.S. military apparently complained, fearful of interference from intelligence agents.  As a result the idea has been scrapped.

What is clear is that the U.S. government needs to do something to secure its information from malicious governments like China or organizations like Wikileaks.  What is less clear is how that should be accomplished exactly.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
A Little More Evil Every Day
By Redwin on 12/2/2010 9:22:33 AM , Rating: 3
I started off a couple years ago mostly a fan of WikiLeaks, when they seemed like place for legitimate whistle blowers to get information out. Sometimes the public DOES need to know if there is serious wrongdoing going on and being covered up.

Then, I started getting uncomfortable with them when they started releasing war documents and footage. That sort of thing can be used as recruiting tools against us, and put our soldiers in danger, and while some of the collateral damage is tragic, none of it was surprising, or actionable. They suddenly seemed much more like an anti-war activist organization who didn't care if they endangered American soldiers while pushing their viewpoint.

Now that they are just releasing diplomatic cables and all this classified information that we really don't need to know about, I'm all the way on the side of trying to get rid of WikiLeaks and charging its operators with espionage if they come to the US.

This isn't whistle blowing, the revealed info doesn't show wrongdoing, and most of it isn't even really "surprising" either; its just pointlessly damaging to this country.

Screw Julian Assange.




RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By SSDMaster on 12/2/2010 9:29:00 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Now that they are just releasing diplomatic cables and all this classified information that we really don't need to know about


Let me be the Judge of what I need to know. If individuals knew more about what War was really like maybe they'd be less hesitant to back it. Keeping information from the public can mean the same thing as releasing it.

Both tactics are used to push a "viewpoint".


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By mcnabney on 12/2/2010 10:03:32 AM , Rating: 2
This info was revealed by WikiLeaks

1. China and the US were negotiating to 'sell-out' North Korea and allow a South Korea government to run the peninsula.
2. The US was negotiating with Pakistan to secure their weapons-grade nuclear material.
3. The US and Egypt/Saudi Arabia were negotiating to isolate and possibly take action against Iran.
4. Plus all of the other embarassing, but typical diplomatic stuff.

Crap like this can start wars. Especially the North Korean info. Dear Leader is downright crazy and revealing to him that his Chinese allies aren't really allies could provoke worse behavior. Maybe it already did. Maybe those four South Korean deaths are already a result of this?


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By wordsworm on 12/2/2010 10:14:33 AM , Rating: 3
The N. Koreans basically were objecting to war games happening virtually on their border. After warning the US and S. Korea repeatedly, they fired what was, in essence, a warning shot.

Julian Assange has essentially brought to light the truth of what the US gov't has been up to. Quite frankly, I think he should be seen as a hero. He should be given the same protection as any reporter publishing the news.

If he had done this to the Chinese gov't, the tune sung would be entirely of a different melody.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Totally on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 11:00:40 AM , Rating: 3
I believe we can't claim a war to be noble when there are reports of us(the US) doing some shady stuff in the background.... would you rather it stay swept under the rug? These people need to be held accountable.

Wikileaks is doing what our government promises to each and every year and fails, it is called transparency and I for one, enjoy it. Sadly a lot of those documents are 30 yrs old. Need more current information. Our government should have nothing to fear if they are open with their people.

They are not.

A lot of people on here professed to want "transparency" and when someone comes along and forces it, suddenly it is "terrorism, treason, espionage, and etc" that, is a joke.

To add more, you don't find it a bit strange that WikiLeaks offered to sit down and go through some the cables with the US to find out which ones may endanger troops only to be given the cold shoulder? They don't want any of the documents leaked because there will be many red faces. So instead of coming to some sort of agreement to help keep troops safe they blow off WikILeaks and use the "Our Troops Will Be In Danger, boycott these people!" phrase. They said the same stuff last time I have yet to hear of a report where leaked classified information from WikiLeaks resulted in the death of a soldier. They are using it as a shield, and it annoys me.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2010 12:20:10 PM , Rating: 3
As much as I am for transparency there are private discussions the average person doesn't need to know about. With your mentality should we even have classified information? Just give out everything right?

Transparency refers to the government telling their citizens what they're doing on national matters such as the passage of laws. Not what one person said about a foreign head of state. Or what the plan is to attack another nation if it has to happen. And damn sure not what troops are doing and who informants are.

When members of a terrorist organization publicly thank you for the information you've made available to the world, you might have done something you shouldn't.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By HrilL on 12/2/10, Rating: 0
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Iaiken on 12/2/2010 1:59:06 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
All diplomatic and political information should be public. Not just in our country but in every one. How else are you supposed to hold people accountable for their actions?


Let me start out by asking you one question.

WHAT PLANET ARE YOU FROM!?!

Even nations that are as close as allies can be (US-Canada) are in direct competition with each other in at least some facets. It is the job of the Canadian and US governments to look out for their citizens and businesses interests at the global level and sometimes these interest clash (usually over unilateral trade).

Hypothetical: Say the US is currently the exclusive importer of lumber to Somecountry and Canada secures lumber trade rights as well. This is in the interest of the Canadian lumber industry, but damages the American lumber industry. This was a unilateral trade agreement and the Americans know that the Canadians didn't have to talk to them about it. In fact, if they had, the US would have likely taken discrete action to prevent it.

Permutations of the above take place practically all around the world, all day, every day and most of it doesn't come to under public scrutiny until afterwards. Even then, the public will never know that Somecountry only engaged in trade with Canada because their president thought George W. was a twat.

quote:
Not all government information should be made public like where are nuclear arsenal is stored what weapons we have and information like that should not be public.


Just to turn this around on you, why is it that you think that diplomats should be held accountable for what they say, but that nations should keep the arms that they will use to shoot at each other if they say the wrong thing a secret?

quote:
No informants were actually outed.


This is a flat out lie born of utter ignorance. Numerous sources have been outed in the yet unreleased documents and all of the recipient media outlets have flat out stated that the documents that they received were completely unabridged. The news outlets acted responsibly and didn't show any specific names, they have all stated that there are thousands of cases in the documents where the names of informants, sources and other high interest individuals were written in plain text with explicit notes that these individuals remain confidential, protected, secret etc.

[quote]No one has died over the leaked documents.[/quote]

So I guess that Khalifa Abdullah beheaded himself and that the 90+ other American collaborators that had to leave Afganistan under threat of death fabricated their stories.

Only a tiny fraction of the latest round of documents have even been published and because none of these 10,000 contained the names of individuals, you make the retarded assumption that the remaining 230,000+ documents won't either. If you were one of the named humanitarian sources in China, would you stake a life in prison on that?

Get real.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By The Raven on 12/2/10, Rating: 0
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By snyper256 on 12/3/2010 2:18:15 PM , Rating: 2
WikiLeaks has changed the rules, whether people like it or not. And it applies to every government.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 1:25:25 PM , Rating: 1
I disagree heartily. Our dipolmats and military are horrible at their transparency, as these leaks prove.

Ever since WWI, the US has been on a massive imperialism chase (kind of like the UK, France, Spain, and etc did in the 1500s) and every single attempt has failed horribly.

Case in point, Iraq, Iran, Colombia, Venzuela, Korea, Vietnam, and more.

I do not have a lot of faith in our (the US) forgein relations departments and/or military leaders. They have proven time and time again not to care what the local populace thinks, look how well that worked for England in the 1700s. ;)


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By geddarkstorm on 12/2/2010 1:40:09 PM , Rating: 4
The US has not been on an imperialism chase. We don't form colonies, or rule over other nations. Yes, the US in the 70's especially was doing terrible things: overthrowing governments to install more "pro" American governments, sometimes with the goal to simply make sure the price of coffee and bananas stayed low! Still, we didn't rule over those governments, and many of them turned against us immediately after.

We were being jerks. But "imperialism"? No. People need to actually learn what that word means instead of throwing it around like a boogyman.

Vietnam was the ONLY imperialistic event in recent history, but it wasn't on our side, it was France. We were responding to a call to help our ally, France, it was France who was being imperialistic. In fact, France still is, just look at the Ivory Coast.

Iraq is also a beautiful example of what I mean. We over threw a hostile government, who was using internationally banned weapons on its own people for ethnic cleansing, and threatening to invade, again, nearby countries. But once we had gotten rid of the mad man and allowed the people of that nation to elect and form their own government, what have we done? We've LEFT. We aren't ruling over them, or making them a colony. We left, and have allowed them to go to their own devices now that they aren't on the brink of ripping themselves apart through self destructive sectarian violence.

So, again, no. The US is not on any sort of imperialism chase (like France actually still is). We just happen to be the strong man of the UN, keeping the world's peace. And like any police officer, it's easy for people to hate us without understanding just hat we've protected them for, so that they could hate us (and without retribution).


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 2:05:55 PM , Rating: 3
The US was on an imperialistic chase and still is. Let us use the definition from Merriam Webster.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/imperial...
quote:

Definition of IMPERIALISM
1: imperial government, authority, or system
2: the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence <union imperialism>

We have engaged in number 2 defnition quite a bit in the past 80 yrs.

What do you call the US setting up governments in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Korea, Venzeula, Colombia and etc?

You might not want to call it what it is but that is up to you.

We invaded a sovereign nation, that we gave the chemicals to(in the 80s) so he could "cleanse" his people. We allowed what happened in Iraq to happen in an attempt (poorly I might add) to prevent a socialistic government from rising in Iran. Oh that evil boogeyman that is socialism. :eyeroll:


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By borismkv on 12/2/10, Rating: 0
By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:06:35 AM , Rating: 3
Imperialism isn't bad? I guess not if you are the imperialist country dominating the others.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By geddarkstorm on 12/2/2010 9:03:42 PM , Rating: 3
I was going off this definition:

im·pe·ri·al·ism /?m'p??ri??l?z?m/ –noun
1.the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.
2.advocacy of imperial interests.
3.an imperial system of government.
4.imperial government.
5.British. the policy of so uniting the separate parts of an empire with separate governments as to secure for certain purposes a single state.

If we change the definition of words, you can call anything anything you want. But, having indirect influence over something is imperialistic? Then, I'm afraid, every country, corporation, or entity holding any position of power is imperialistic. Not a reasonable definition, I would argue.


By Reclaimer77 on 12/2/2010 9:48:22 PM , Rating: 5
Liberals decry us for not being a big enough member of the "world community", yet in the next breath accuse us of being Imperialistic.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By whoisnader on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Targon on 12/3/2010 1:16:45 AM , Rating: 2
You fail to understand some very basic things about how the WORLD works. For the most part, the policies of the government do NOT represent the will of the people in that country. Here in the USA, the vast majority have been so disgusted by the actions of the government that there is a clear difference between the attitude of the government and that of the citizens.

You, and other people around the world really need to point fingers at the US government as a different entity than the USA, because there really are TWO United States of Americas. The US Government may have a lot of things going on, but you share some horrible similarities with terrorists.

Case in point, the US government does something horrible, and suddenly "Americans" are at fault, government, military, and civilians. That is the same thinking that makes it acceptable to a terrorist to kill any random person! The definition of a terrorist is one who will intentionally target and kill civilians in a conflict, rather than targeting military/government personnel/installations.

I am not saying the government is not guilty, but you clearly have the attitude that the actions of ANY government will always follow the will of the people, when in many(or even most) cases, they do not.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By BadAcid on 12/2/2010 1:53:56 PM , Rating: 1
Well, at least we made it so half the local populace is allowed to think now.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Reclaimer77 on 12/2/2010 5:12:36 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Our dipolmats and military are horrible at their transparency, as these leaks prove.


I wasn't aware transparency was required by the military or our diplomats. Since when?

As far as the freedom of speech issue, Assange I don't think that's going to cut it here. Amazon also has that same freedom of speech, and they just exercised it.

This is a democracy, if you don't like the way things are going, there are channels and appropriate things you can do to make your case. Committing treason and breaking laws to dump hundreds of thousands of documents to a leak site is NOT one of them.

Our biggest need for transparency is in Congress and the White House on domestic issues. THAT is what we are actually supposed to have a say in. Not what the CIA is doing thousands of miles away.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 5:22:33 PM , Rating: 2
It is required by our military/government. If we don't know how bad they are screwing up the situtation how can we effectively change or put pressure on our governmental people to force them to change?

The whole government(military included) needs to be more transparent to its people so we can finally have a say in how it operates correctly. That is the largest problem right now facing this country.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By borismkv on 12/2/2010 6:25:49 PM , Rating: 3
What, do you want a daily note from the Army that says exactly what they're up to? Good luck winning a war with that. Hell...Good luck getting any soldiers back *alive* with that.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 12/2/2010 6:32:14 PM , Rating: 2
I think you vastly overestimate the cognitive abilities of the american public. Or their ability to handle the truth about how the world operates.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Reclaimer77 on 12/2/2010 8:00:49 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong. The military and intelligence organizations are required to be transparent TO our Government. Not to give you, Anoxanmore, a daily report of their activities.

quote:
The whole government(military included) needs to be more transparent to its people so we can finally have a say in how it operates correctly.


Yeah cause we really want the same dumbasses who voted Obama into office to have it's "say" in how the military operates lmao!!!

quote:
That is the largest problem right now facing this country.


You are SO liberal lol. Our biggest problem is what the military is doing?? Only a Liberal would say that when people like you are in office spending trillions we don't have on pet projects and pork barrel "stimulus" bills.

I know you don't see it because, in your mind, those are just good people trying to do what's right. While the military is just out there killing babies like the warmongering savages they are.

Just remember, the people filling your head with this bullshit are the same ones that voted for our boys to go over there by a huge majority in the first place.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Reclaimer77 on 12/3/2010 8:20:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Right. They are required to keep the Public up to date on their activities. That is outlined quite clearly in the Constitution you supposedly support.


We ARE up to date, almost everything the military does is public. Hell when so much as an aircraft carrier gets dispatched it's on the freaking news! Things get made public through an eventual compartmentalized declassification process. What you are talking about is the general public being made aware of time-sensitive operations when men are still in the field and lives could be at risk. I can't believe you seriously don't see the flaw in your reasoning.

And again, are you an Anarchist? If you want things to change, fine, there are Constitutional ways to go about it. You don't support someone stealing documents and releasing them on the Internet because it upholds your little fantasies of how we're responsible for every ill in the world.

quote:
Yes, I am liberal, I stand for freedom and equality of everyone. You however, being conservative, would prefer to see a dictatorship like that of Germany in WWII, Japan in WWII or say Russia under Stalin.


That makes no sense at all. I can't even get offended, I just feel pity for you. Plus you are a bad liar. Half the military engagements you condemn were to stop entire countries from being subjugated and oppressed. You stand for freedom for everyone? When Saddam was filling mass graves of tens of thousands of his own people, were you defending their freedom? When the free people of Korea were threatened by Communist rule, I guess defending their freedom wasn't noble enough?

I'm supporting dictatorships? Please explain. I would love to hear this one.

You keep using this word "imperialism". Based on your definition it's apparently anytime we use our military, for any reason. I propose to you that if we were truly imperialists we would have conquered half the world by now. We sure as hell wouldn't be interested in turning Iraq over to be run by it's own people.

quote:
It allows corruptions and bribes to rum rampant. Afghanistan, Korea, Iraq, Iran, Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Panama & etc all show that very clearly. (All of those were just in the past 30 yrs)


Wrong, those countries own laws and systems allow for the corruptions and bribes. You cannot seriously be saying the United States is directly responsible for the condition of every other country.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/2010 12:02:11 PM , Rating: 2
We aren't up to date otherwise these documents wouldn't be "news".

I support someone releasing information the public should know about. How about those faked WMD documents showing Iraq had them? Too bad we can't see those anymore since they vanished after the invasion began.

All those military interventions I mentioned were not to stop the people from being subjucted. Most of those, were because the governments coming into power at the time were based off of communism and/or socialism. Example, Iran in 1950s.

Why did the US put Saddam in power in the first place in Iraq? Oh right, he supported the US at the time in their opposition to the possible peace that Iran offered. Saddam's hatred of Persians fueled the US's desire to keep the region destablized after Iran attempted to form the Middle East into a peaceful colition. (With Isreal even)

Imperialism is clearly when the US tries(and fails I might add) to add its political, and culturual influence on another nation that does not ask for it. *cough*Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, & etc*cough*

If the US would stay out of other countries I named, I wouldn't blame us for the issues in those other countries.

You should travel the world sometime Reclaimer, it is a huge eye opener when you leave the states.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Reclaimer77 on 12/3/2010 12:37:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Imperialism is clearly when the US tries(and fails I might add) to add its political, and culturual influence on another nation that does not ask for it.


No, that's actually NOT what imperialism is. That's what YOU define it as. This is like me saying a toaster is clearly something meant to mow your lawn.

And cultural influence, really? I'm surprised someone as Liberal as you would associate such a negative connotation with the sharing of cultures. Your type is always claiming that we're narrow minded and need to embrace other cultures more, and yet when we share our culture it's "imperialistic"?

Can you explain to me how we're supposed to be a member of the UN, the international community, and one of if not the last remaining superpower and yet exert absolutely NO influence at all anywhere in the world?

Why don't you just admit the truth? You're a typical anti-American Liberal. Isn't that really what the issue here is? You just hate America. Period.

quote:
You should travel the world sometime Reclaimer, it is a huge eye opener when you leave the states.


And you should open your eyes and appreciate what you have right HERE a little more. And show some respect for the men and women who, no matter what your opinion of it is, risk their lives for their country. I come from a long line of patriots, and frankly, your flippant childish statements about how 'evil' we are and everything we do disgusts me and offends everything we hold dear.

When you say the last "noble" war was WWII (as if any war can be thought of as noble, you idiot) you're pissing on the graves of all the people who gave their lives since. It does no matter what your opinion of the conflicts were, opinions are like assholes so learn how to keep yours shut!

And you should also have the brains to realize you only hear about what we do in other countries when it goes bad. You should be smart enough to realize that, on the whole, what the military and the CIA does IS necessary and the successes are rarely, if ever, revealed.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/2010 12:47:47 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it is what imperialism means, I defined it in my previous post(s). May I suggest you learn the language of the land?

Forcing another country to adhere to another countries culture is wrong.

Sure, we can be a member in the UN and have trade with all countries and alliagencies with none. (That is what a Founding Father(s) wanted). You should look up that quote.

I love this country more than you do as I moved here, I wasn't born here. So I was given a choice, can you say the same?

Sorry there hasn't been a war worth fighting for since WWII, you can disagree all you want, but when was the last time the US was actually threatened military wise? Oh right, the 1940s.

There haven't been a lot of CIA successes (at least for promoting peace anyway) what has worked well is keeping other countires in turmoil as opposed to being the "peace-keeper" that the US (we) supposedly claim to be. That is a farce.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Reclaimer77 on 12/3/2010 2:19:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sorry there hasn't been a war worth fighting for since WWII, you can disagree all you want, but when was the last time the US was actually threatened military wise? Oh right, the 1940s.


I would have assumed you realized the lesson of WWII. Don't wait for anymore Hitlers to come to power. Why wait until we're threatened military wise? Also, again, we have allies. If they are threatened we can't just sit back and say "well sorry guys, they're no threat to us"

It's interesting you keep bringing up WWII, because your beliefs and attitudes are the EXACT thing that allowed WWII to happen. Your 'special' blend of isolationism and apathy is DIRECTLY what lead to a world war in the first place.

quote:
I love this country more than you do as I moved here, I wasn't born here. So I was given a choice, can you say the same?


This is a joke, right? Could you possibly be any more moronic and offensive? You're now claiming you love the United States more than a native, because you "chose" to move here?

quote:
Forcing another country to adhere to another countries culture is wrong.


It's impossible to force culture on another, so this is a straw man. You continue to make us out to be International thugs and bullies that everyone just puts up with because and lets us get away with whatever we want. But culture? Really?

I give up with you. Really. I'm not the first to try to talk sense into you on this, let one of them carry the torch.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/2010 2:39:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

I would have assumed you realized the lesson of WWII. Don't wait for anymore Hitlers to come to power. Why wait until we're threatened military wise? Also, again, we have allies. If they are threatened we can't just sit back and say "well sorry guys, they're no threat to us"

It's interesting you keep bringing up WWII, because your beliefs and attitudes are the EXACT thing that allowed WWII to happen. Your 'special' blend of isolationism and apathy is DIRECTLY what lead to a world war in the first place.

Actually what lead to WWII was left over animosity from WWI. That and allowing a nation to persecute another religion/ethnic group to the point where the local populace was helpless to stop it. Kind of sounds like where the US is headed at the moment.

quote:

This is a joke, right? Could you possibly be any more moronic and offensive? You're now claiming you love the United States more than a native, because you "chose" to move here?

No it isn't a joke. You called me unAmerican, I very much disagree as since I immigrated here, I embody the very essence of the United States, you being a native, do not.

quote:

It's impossible to force culture on another, so this is a straw man. You continue to make us out to be International thugs and bullies that everyone just puts up with because and lets us get away with whatever we want. But culture? Really?

I give up with you. Really. I'm not the first to try to talk sense into you on this, let one of them carry the torch.

You didn't try to talk sense into me, you insulted me and called me names. I did nothing of the sort to you.

You can try to impose your culture on another(which is part of imperialism), and as the US has demonstrated many, many, times it fails horribly unless the local populace wants it.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Topweasel on 12/6/2010 1:54:11 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Actually what lead to WWII was left over animosity from WWI. That and allowing a nation to persecute another religion/ethnic group to the point where the local populace was helpless to stop it. Kind of sounds like where the US is headed at the moment.


Actually what you are talking about is the Holocaust not world war II. Much like the Civil war and Slavery the well being of the European Jew had little to do with the war. The world cared that Germany just blitzed Poland, or walked into France, what happened to the the Jewish inhabitants didn't even really become apparent till German retreat.


By Skywalker123 on 12/6/2010 3:14:19 AM , Rating: 2
Thats because the Cia's successes are rare


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By wordsworm on 12/2/2010 10:12:43 PM , Rating: 2
So, in other words: freedom of speech as long as it's my idea of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech such as that is not freedom of speech.

Mr. Wikileaks, I can never remember his name, in any case, did what any self respecting reporter would have done: report the hell of a load of facts that were not forthcoming.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Targon on 12/3/2010 1:22:45 AM , Rating: 2
A good reporter will report what is going on, but will put in the proper effort to discriminate what information is made available. Do you really feel that full video coverage of a rape needs to be shown by the media when they report that sort of crime?

Freedom of speech covers you being able to state your opinion, but it does not go to releasing private information since that violates the rights of others. At no time should freedom of speech give you the right to put the lives of other people at risk!


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Kurz on 12/3/2010 12:18:39 PM , Rating: 1
Wow horrible analogy on the rape video.

quote:
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Freedom of speech regards to anything you say regardless of the damages. Nothing is said about government secrets. Which back then they were all about Government Transparency. The fact we have this information gives a chance for us to 'redress of grievances'.

The government is a public instiution and it shouldn't be an organization of lies and cloak and dagger type of stuff.
If you work in the line of work that is cloak and dagger you already understand the risks of being found out.

Though the intelligence agencies around the world probably has even dirtier intelligence already, this is leak is nothing in comprison.


By Reclaimer77 on 12/3/2010 12:52:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Though the intelligence agencies around the world probably has even dirtier intelligence already, this is leak is nothing in comprison.


Nope. Clearly only the United Stats has intelligence ops, a military, and embassies in other countries.

/sarcasm.


By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:10:30 AM , Rating: 1
Assange is NOT a U.S. citizen so he cannot commit treason against the U.S.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Iaiken on 12/2/2010 1:02:50 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Julian Assange has essentially brought to light the truth of what the US gov't has been up to. Quite frankly, I think he should be seen as a hero.


So let's say that he knowingly and willingly releases documents that start a war resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Is he still a hero? Is he culpable? Both?

quote:
If he had done this to the Chinese gov't, the tune sung would be entirely of a different melody.


This is the problem at the heart of the matter. He doesn't approach his leaks in an unbiased manner. The longer this goes on, the clearer it becomes that he personally has a vendetta against the US government and is using Wikileaks to target them without restraint. Wikileaks documents pertain almost wholly (85%+) to the US now.

While the following is purely conjecture on my part, I wouldn't be surprised if he had information on other nations that he has withheld. I also wouldn't be surprised if he was withholding such information to avoid drawing attention away from the US until he has finished griding his Axe for America. Unfortunately, the only person who knows about all of the information he has available to him and his personal motives (if any) is he himself.

What he has done could undermine the level of candidness that nations deal with each other on. Even if only temporarily, close allies will think very carefully about how honest they want to be with their friends with regard to their other "friends".

How accurately can the worlds public judge efforts like those seeking the peaceful union of the Koreas under a democratic government before they come to fruition? All bringing things like this to light does is allow those others who work against such efforts to better direct their own efforts (at best) or become more dangerous and erratic (at worst).

Basically, there are some things that the public needs to know, other things that the public doesn't NEED to know and yet other things that are so dangerous that they simply cannot be made public until they are no longer relevant.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Iaiken on 12/2/2010 2:10:49 PM , Rating: 2
All of your links pertain purely to the US cables and what American diplomats and sources believe to be the case .

Let me repeat that in case you were too stupid to understand.

The source material for each of those articles came from the leaked US cables and are the opinions and beliefs of the individuals involved in the discussion.

If you are attempting to dispel my assertion that Assange is targeting the US government, you're doing a piss-poor job. Each of these articles is damaging to US-Russian relations by virtue of showing Russians around the world what these US diplomats think of their government. If the beliefs turn out to be spurious conjecture, but are taken to as fact by portions of the Russian public, then both the Russian government would be understandably upset.

In conclusion, you're an idiot.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/2/2010 2:43:46 PM , Rating: 1
"opinions and beliefs of the individuals involved in the discussion"

It's not opinions, it's the result of Spanish investigation and arrests.

[citation]
Spain conducted two major operations – codenamed Avispa (2005-07) and Troika (2008-09) – against mafia networks on its territory, resulting in the arrest of more than 60 suspects. They include four of the alleged leaders outside Russia: Gennady Petrov, Alexander Malyshev (Petrov's deputy), Vitaly Izguilov (a key lieutenant) and Kalashov. Despite this, the networks are said to have swiftly reconstituted.

Litvinenko secretly met Spanish security officers in May 2006, six months before his death, the cable reported. Another cable, quoting an investigation by Spain's flagship centre-left daily newspaper El País, said Litvinenko tipped off Spanish security officials on the "locations, roles, and activities of several 'Russian' mafia figures with ties to Spain".

Gonzalez claimed the KGB and its SVR successor had deliberately created the LDPR. Some of its ranks were now home to serious criminals who owned large mansions in Spain, he said. He further alleged there were proven ties between the Russian political parties – all of which support the Kremlin – and "organised crime and arms trafficking"..

"those recently arrested in Spain were involved in a complex web of shady business dealings and enjoyed a murky relationship with senior Russian government officials".


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Iaiken on 12/2/2010 3:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

Gonzalez claimed the KGB and its SVR successor had deliberately created the LDPR. Some of its ranks were now home to serious criminals who owned large mansions in Spain, he said. He further alleged there were proven ties between the Russian political parties – all of which support the Kremlin – and "organised crime and arms trafficking".


Agian, your reading and comprehension skills fail you, I've added emphasis to where it happened. Gonzalez was making alegations, which may be factual or may be completely unfounded, none of the reports I've read on the subject before or after the cables provide a conclusive position on the matter. I could aledge that you are a serial rapist, that doesn't mean you are. As far as I can tell, these are the Spanish prosecutors own personal opinions of Russian mafia operations in Spain.

quote:
"those recently arrested in Spain were involved in a complex web of shady business dealings and enjoyed a murky relationship with senior Russian government officials".


This is again a yet unproven allegation made by the Spanish prosecutor as his personal assessment of the individuals so arreseted. It will remain as such until such time as he can prove it in a Spanish court of law.

Until then, it is something that likely should have remained private until it could be proven or disproven as it has now landed both the US and Spain in hot water with the Russian government.

Please try again.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/2/2010 4:30:55 PM , Rating: 1
You are such a naive person if you think that Spain even having 100 percent prove of Kremlin - mafia connections and wrongdoings would really issue arrest warrant to Putin's mafia or make it in any way public. Nice, have a cookie.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Iaiken on 12/2/2010 4:47:32 PM , Rating: 2
And you are an imbecile if you think that any nation should publicly allege that the government of Russia is comprised of Mafiosi without solid proof to back it up and that they could do so without repercussion.

To top it off, you expressed it in a profoundly stupid way.

Seriously, what planet are you from? Tell them they need to step up their teaching of grammar and spelling in school there...


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Iaiken on 12/2/2010 3:52:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's not opinions, it's the result of an ONGOING Spanish investigation and arrests of people who have yet to be prosecuted in a court of law .


Fixed!


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Solandri on 12/2/2010 2:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
While the following is purely conjecture on my part, I wouldn't be surprised if he had information on other nations that he has withheld. I also wouldn't be surprised if he was withholding such information to avoid drawing attention away from the US until he has finished griding his Axe for America. Unfortunately, the only person who knows about all of the information he has available to him and his personal motives (if any) is he himself.

That's the main thing that bugs me about Wikileaks. They operate with philosophy that transparency and the public's right to know exceeds government and corporate rights to keep secrets. But they do not practice it themselves. They are pretty secretive about how they operate, who donates to them, how they decide to do what they do, and Assange is one of the most secretive quasi-celebrities on the planet.

If you believe the world is better off without any secrets, then you should first strive to make yourself and your organization operate in that manner. After you've proven to yourself that your philosophy is self-sustainable, only then you should go about trying to apply it to others. Upholding others to standards you yourself don't practice just strikes me as a thinly veiled excuse to practice your own biases.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By adiposity on 12/2/2010 5:36:26 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure what the founding principles of wikileaks are, but if they seek the transparency of governments then they have no obligation to also be transparent.

Sure, it might be nice to know exactly how they operate, but then, they wouldn't be able to get anything done.

They are, after a sense, journalists. Not really, but they "report" information, and need to keep sources secret. Otherwise, they couldn't do what they intend to do.

None of this means they have any moral high ground over the U.S., of course. It just means their desire for transparency in govt. does not contradict their need for secrecy to accomplish that goal.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By The Raven on 12/2/2010 3:01:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
So let's say that he knowingly and willingly releases documents that start a war resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Is he still a hero? Is he culpable? Both?

Better yet, let's say (in honor of Leslie Nielsen let's actually say it in unison ;-) that he knowingly and willingly releases documents that draws critical light to a war that has already resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands (approx 100k depending on sources. Wikileaks puts the number at 109,032, Iraqis only. US military casualties are at 4500 deaths and 30,000 WIA). Is he still a hero? Is he culpable? Both?

I understand where you are coming from. I have a cousin and a good friend who are out there in Afghanistan and Iraq respectively and I want them to be safe when they are over there. But I think it is more important to know if they should be over there at all. I also am one of the bright-siders who is seeing the good that we have done for the people who were oppressed under Saddam. But I am very wary of what the gov't is doing these days in my personal life, the economy, etc. Why should I be any more comfortable about how they are handling foreign affairs or military matters. And to think those people are putting people who I care for deeply in the line of fire? Suffice it to say that I am very wary of this.

The fourth verse of our national anthem is as follows:
quote:
O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand Between their loved home and the war's desolation! Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation. Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just , And this be our motto: "In God is our trust." And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

How are we to know if our cause is just if we are kept in the dark about such things? We have the most advanced, powerful military on the face of the earth. Do we really need all of this secrecy? Hell the secrecy is probably part of the reason why people other people around the world don't trust us. I mean we can't trust Saddam with a couple WMDs yet we expect the people of the rest of the world to trust us with our huge military? I don't even trust them and I live here.

My personal opinion is that Manning and Assange should not be criticized for their actions as they are now. Are they perfect? Did they handle the leaks perfectly? Is Assange guilty of rape? Heros? That's all up for discussion, but I'm glad they are giving the public info so we can make better decisions.

As to whether Manning is a traitor, I think that he should not be labeled as such because he exposed the documents to the public. Not to our enemies. IMHO if he got the docs and went to the enemy with them without our knowledge then he would surely be a traitor. But it seems that he truely believed that the US was doing something wrong, which I don't necessarily agree with but may well be the case depending on who you ask. That decision should be left to the citizens to decide.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Smilin on 12/2/2010 1:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
You naive dumbass.

We do excercises with South Korea EVERY YEAR. These most recent excercises were actually an annual event. Strangely you never heard the uproar in the past did you?

Know why? Because N. Korea only uses this as an excuse to cause trouble for attention. Any time the world isn't showing them enough attention we have some sort of "incident". This griping about military excercises was just the excuse they used this time.

Why do they need more attention right now? Because they are doing a handover of power. That means gifts, big gifts, to leaders and celebrations (public relations) for the people. It just so happens they are broke. Why make an incident then? Because it gets the six parties back to the negotiation table where they can ask for food, humanitarian shipments, and relief from sanctions....just like they have done during past incidents.

Oh and BTW since when does a warning shot land artillery rounds on top of civilians? People are dead you f'n dick.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:27:33 AM , Rating: 2
Know why? Because N. Korea only uses this as an excuse to cause trouble for attention. Any time the world isn't showing them enough attention we have some sort of "incident". This griping about military excercises was just the excuse they used this time.

Are you talking about the U.S. and the Gulf of Tonkin "incident"?


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Smilin on 12/3/2010 10:46:58 AM , Rating: 1
N. Korean certainly didn't invent the "military incident" nor do they have a patent on it.

Their motive remains to become a threat so we are forced to deal with them. They may or may not make gains from this but if we don't pay attention to them then they are guaranteed not to make gains.

Our motive in Tonkin was just an early excercise in Hermann Goering's premise:
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.".
Our WMD claims in Iraq are the perfection of the technique.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By wordsworm on 12/3/2010 9:11:32 AM , Rating: 2
You obviously lack understanding. So, I will try to be patient with you: S. Korea and the US were doing exercises on the border between N. and S. Korea. Now, if N. Korea started doing military exercises on the border of the US, you really suppose the US military would be OK with that?

According to the news, N. Korea repeatedly told the US and S. Korea to cease its military exercises in the area that they were. They refused to comply with the request. I call it a warning shot because it only killed four people. Of course, it did not work.

Quite frankly, I think both S. Korea and the US are aggravating the situation. They could have simply moved the war games down somewhere further south and invited N. Korea if they really wanted that audience. That would have been the right thing to do, and likely four people who died would not have died.

There are always many sides to the same story. Try to see the issues from Pyongyang's side as well as Seoul's. You might find that the issues are far from one sided.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Smilin on 12/3/2010 10:30:36 AM , Rating: 2
My understanding is just fine, thanks. I'm all for "two sides to any argument" but this doesn't mean both sides are always equal. N. Korea is very much to blame here. They are committing outright acts of war, not provocations. People are dead.

1. Yes, US/S. Korea excercise near the area where an expected conflict would occur. You want them to practice out at Hawaii or something?
2. They do these same excercise in the same area EVERY YEAR.
3. N. Korea does their own excercises in similar ways. S. Korea gripes about it but they don't sink a N. Korean boat, or shell civilians, or fire ballistic missles over their country (like N. Korea did with Japan).
4. Every other military power in the world does their excercises in the same way. How do you think US and Soviets kept bumping subs? Why do you think Russian bombers do darting near Canada and the UK today?
5. North Korea complains when it suits them and allows it to slide otherwise. If it was a REAL issue and just not political posturing they would complain EVERY year.

The whole "we're mad about your excercises" is a crock. If they weren't doing excercises then it would be some other excuse...another nuke test because they don't like the latest ABM testing in the US. Who knows?


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By wordsworm on 12/4/2010 10:17:39 PM , Rating: 2
OK, when the US allows N. Korea to practice its war games in the gulf of Mexico, I'll buy your propaganda.

Busan would have been a good area to practice. N. Korea had told the US and S. Korea months in advance that it wasn't comfortable with it doing exercises in the Yellow Sea.

You should also be aware that there have been many assassination attempts on Kim Jong Il's life.

To be perfectly honest, I'd love to see N. Korea collapse into the fold of a single Korea.

You know, the US kind of went amok nearly 10 years ago: ignoring the Geneva Convention, attacking Iraq without cause, and naming N. Korea as a target by putting it in with the Axis of Evil despite the fact that N. Korea had less to do with 911 than Canada did.

Maybe, if for once, people listened to PROK, we'd have a much more amicable relationship with it. In the meantime, maybe you should give up the 'we're always right' mentality that clouds your judgment.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Smilin on 12/6/2010 5:20:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
OK, when the US allows N. Korea to practice its war games in the gulf of Mexico, I'll buy your propaganda.

Since you and I both know N. Korea would gain nothing from this and they won't do it you're basically saying you'll "buy my propaganda" never. Seems openminded.

quote:
Busan would have been a good area to practice. N. Korea had told the US and S. Korea months in advance that it wasn't comfortable with it doing exercises in the Yellow Sea.

Yep. They actually told us years ago. Please read what I said. We do this every year. So do they. Them being "uncomfortable" is just the excuse they used.
quote:
To be perfectly honest, I'd love to see N. Korea collapse into the fold of a single Korea.

A lot of us want this. Don't see it happening.

quote:
You know, the US kind of went amok nearly 10 years ago: ignoring the Geneva Convention, attacking Iraq without cause, and naming N. Korea as a target by putting it in with the Axis of Evil despite the fact that N. Korea had less to do with 911 than Canada did.

We have done some downright terrible things in the middle east. If that was your point I'll readily agree. You're altering the context of the axis of evil quote though. It had nothing to do with 911. N. Korea is certainly living up to the label though.

quote:
Maybe, if for once, people listened to PROK, we'd have a much more amicable relationship with it. In the meantime, maybe you should give up the 'we're always right' mentality that clouds your judgment.

You mean if we listened to them while they refuse to join negotiations? Interesting premise. Maybe we should listen to them give their word about Nukes then break it?

There is nothing about my mentality that says "we're always right". Nothing (see above re:middle east). Since that mentality simply doesn't exist it doesn't lend itself to clouding my judgement.

There are a lot of two sided issues in the world and in many cases I find the US acting like a bully. In this case though it's pretty one sided. N. Korea is literally attacking it's neighbor. Not just say "planes in airspace" types of posturing either...people are dead. At the same time they give their word about Nukes then go and develop them in secret. Think those Nukes won't propagate? Just like those missles we found them shipping overseas?

N. Korea is wrong on this. Wrong. S. Korea has been following the sunshine policy with them for way too long. They only get rewarded for their food and financial aid with killed sailors and civilians.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By rcc on 12/2/2010 3:45:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If he had done this to the Chinese gov't, the tune sung would be entirely of a different melody.


Indeed. It would be the dirge at his funeral.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By carage on 12/2/2010 4:18:54 PM , Rating: 1
If he had done this to the Chinese gov't, he is presumably dead by now.


By inperfectdarkness on 12/4/2010 8:46:30 PM , Rating: 2
So North Korea sinking a South Korean ship...that was also a "justifiable reaction"? Just checking...because from where I sit, S.Korean war-games are probably in response to that particular incident.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By invidious on 12/2/2010 10:08:31 AM , Rating: 4
Wrong, if you chose to live in America you chose to give the government a certain amount of control. You dont get to know whatever you want because that is a security risk to the rest of us. Read the constitution before you go blathering on about what rights you think you have.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By nonsequitor on 12/2/2010 5:36:14 PM , Rating: 2
I completely agree with your statement 'Let me be the judge of what I need to know', which is why I fully support naked pictures of your wife and daughter being put on the web against their will and am happy when details of your sordid affairs with minors of your same sex are prominently published in world media - whether it is true or not.

You have no reasonable rights to privacy if a legal organisation has no reasonable rights to privacy. As soon as mind-reading becomes technically possible I hope you are indicted for every criminal thought you have, regardless of how quickly it flashed across your mind.

I like this world you have created, but I want you to be the first to live in it!


By foolsgambit11 on 12/2/2010 10:29:39 PM , Rating: 2
That's a red herring. There is clearly a distinction between the acts of public officials and private citizens.

First, a couple of quotes, for and against.

"The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy; the best weapon of a democracy is openness." - Edvard Teller

"The Press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of the government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people." - Justice Hugo Black

"We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know, and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows." - Katherine Graham

I think most reasonable people would agree there is some information the government should withhold. The question is what types of information? And when that is decided, there must be some kind of oversight to prevent the abuse of the privilege of withholding information from our citizenry. We must ensure that classification isn't being used to hide facts that are merely embarrassing to the government. But then, quis custodiet ipsos custodes? When theory meets the real world, things get complicated. Watchdogs and whistleblowers help check government abuse of classification, but if they don't have the best interests of the people at heart, they can do real damage. Black's quote, that one of the purposes of a free press is to prevent 'deception' strikes at the heart of the matter.

Another key question is whether classification should be used to hide embarrassing facts simply because that embarrassment can do harm to U.S. interests. I'm inclined to say no myself. So the release of the video of the U.S. helicopter strikes on civilians would be justified, as well as the diplomatic cables that revealed snide derision of international leaders. But information on intelligence sources or ongoing secret diplomatic negotiations probably wasn't released with the people's best interest in mind, nor was its primary purpose the prevention of government deception (well, maybe a case could be made for the diplomatic negotiations, but it wouldn't be that strong).

Of course, Assange would probably argue that he did have the people's best interest in mind, but on a longer time scale than the minutiae of individual negotiations or military operations, that an informed public and checking government secrecy is a good that trumps the minor short-term harm that these revelations cause. That is a noble principle (whether or not he actually believes it), but principles must be tempered with pragmatism.


By inperfectdarkness on 12/4/2010 8:43:44 PM , Rating: 2
You, as a casual observer, are in no position to make accurate assessments about classified information--especially raw footage of combat. You have neither the scope of expertise nor the background of information to accurately judge such footage. Asserting that the public should be the authority for judgments on such matters is to spit in the face of JAG.

Furthermore, if releases like this cause public support for war to decrease, that is the WORST possible outcome. Vietnam demonstrated all too well what happens when public support for war goes belly-up; the servicemembers pay the price. If you truly are against the conflicts we find ourselves in--then vote in more passive representatives. Politicians make war, not soldiers.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By jonmcc33 on 12/6/2010 11:34:44 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think anyone is supporting the war at this point. The major concern is the US troops and those that have helped the US forces. WikiLeaks is doing nothing but throwing a bees nest into the mix to cause conflict.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Shadowmaster625 on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By priusone on 12/2/2010 10:02:58 AM , Rating: 5
Not to sound too racist, but anyone who's spent time around those in the middle east know how easy it is to get them riled up to the point that they'll grab their AK-47s and their bomb vests.

Here is the main problem. You get a ticked off Imam who tells his flock to avenge their breath and ka-boom. Sure, this would be a great way to get rid of the fanatics, but even if there is a kill ration of 1000 of them to one of ours, that's still to much.

Look, I am not picking on them, I am simply stating what I observed while over there for a year. My guess is that they are just more emotional. I've never seen as many men cry as I have over there. And what were they crying about, you ask? Us finding alcohol in their homes, which we could careless about. We find some of them stealing our personal property, and they beg us not to chop off their hands.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By JasonMick (blog) on 12/2/2010 10:04:21 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
You're just a propagandized fool who swallows all the crap the mainstream media shovels at you. Then you wonder why your country goes to hell, banksters steal all the wealth and your family is dying of cancer. Screw you and all the other stunted husks out there. Wikileaks is only scratching the surface, and the only reason you hate them now is because wikileaks is now threatening the banksters that control just about everything you think as they already robbed you blind.

"Endangered american soldiers" ... aren't parroting idiots like you supposed to be watching fox news?


Funny how anyone who criticizes Wikileaks is "propogandized" or a government tool.

I freely admit, I find the fact that >95 percent of the leaked documents on the site target the U.S. is highly questionable. Does the U.S. engage in >95 percent of the world's wrongdoing? I doubt it.

In my opinion the site is clearly engaging on info-terrorism against the U.S. Whether its motive is anarchism, a misguided sense of global justice, or perhaps funding by a hostile foreign national is immaterial.

Now that's my opinion, and I haven't watched Fox News in years. In fact, I primarily read/watch CNN, which would be regarded as a "liberal" news outlet by some.

I think everyone is entitled to their opinions.

The fact that you're so afraid of someone earnestly opening their heartfelt opinion is evidence that YOU are the one that is propogandized and fearful.

I find it ironic how Wikileaks portray itself as this great crusader of honesty and truth, yet has zero transparency in its site dealings, finances, and procedures. Its excuse is always the same -- it must maintain secrecy because it is in too much danger.

Sound familiar?

It's the same thing the U.S. government has long argued.

Beware false prophets, I say...


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By PReiger99 on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By ClownPuncher on 12/2/2010 11:59:53 AM , Rating: 5
You're calling Jason Mick a Fox News Neo-con? Now I KNOW unicorns have to be real.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2010 12:42:27 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously. Jason is about as liberal as they come.

But even liberals don't like it when a group illegally gets information that makes them look bad.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 1:36:40 PM , Rating: 2
Jason is moderate, he just isn't a crazy fundamentalist like you FIT.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By PReiger99 on 12/2/2010 1:46:34 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't say that Mick was a neocon, my point was with the kind of absurd comparisons he made about Wikileaks, he wouldn't be out of place with the Fox News crowd. Anyway, since Palin already said that Wikileaks = terrorists = Al-Qaeda, I can't blame anyone for jumping to that conclusion.

However, it's still completely silly to put real terrorists and real spies on the same level as an "information terrorists cyberespionage organization" that doesn't infiltrate networks, doesn't use violence, doesn't try to induce fear in innocents, doesn't ask people to blow themselves up or ask their members to exterminate a specific religious/ethnic/etc group.


By ClownPuncher on 12/2/2010 2:00:18 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely. In a world where our government discloses every item to the public, the chaos that ensues would tear our country apart. From the inside as well as in a geopolitical sense.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By thurston on 12/2/10, Rating: 0
By inperfectdarkness on 12/4/2010 9:10:10 PM , Rating: 2
That's certainly one way to frame it. I have another way, Jason, which I think you'll also like.

Let's assume that wikileaks legitimately supports leaking information from ALL world governments. If 95% of the leaked info pertains to the USA, then it probably points to one of two things:

1. We have piss-poor control over classified information

or

2. Our nation is already so liberal with information--even classified information--that it has become impossible to keep it from the prying eyes of "would be whistle-blowers".

In either event, the USA does indeed have a problem with openness; namely too much of it.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By R3T4rd on 12/2/2010 10:23:55 AM , Rating: 1
Another clueless socialist loving fanatic....

Perhaps we stunted american husks swallow maintream media crap but you socialists (European?) wouldn't know what you are swallowing until its been shoved in. Then you asks us "stunted american husks" for help.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2010 12:21:36 PM , Rating: 1
Yes the Wikileaks information is threatening bankers....

What are you smoking?


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By ertomas on 12/2/2010 3:50:47 PM , Rating: 1
Are you Hugo Chavez? I just imagined my dear president on his weekly show pissing all over us "imperial puppets" that think different from him...


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By priusone on 12/2/2010 9:47:50 AM , Rating: 5
From what I have witnessed, mistakes that are made by our Soldiers, Marines, Airmen and women, and Sailors are not done out of hate. A vehicle was shot up as it tried to run a checkpoint, causing it to catch on fire and everyone inside died. Why didn't we rush over and drag the people out? Because Haji likes to make VBIED's and/or wear bomb vests. Turns out it was a family; a family who was fleeing a shootout between some Sunni and Shia's. Sure, we felt bad, but what do you do? You did your job, just like those helicopter pilots who shot at an RPG which turned out to be a video camera.

I wish there could be a leak to show all the good that has happened, but good doesn't sell unfortunately.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By GulWestfale on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2010 12:26:23 PM , Rating: 2
Journalists still have a basis of right and wrong.

If someone gave you the encrypted access keys to military satellites so you could show, in real time, troops moving across the battlefield, would you air a special about it and show it? Including in the information exactly where those troops were?

Personally I'm of the opinion that journalists who take classified information and publish it should not only be required to give up their source, but put in jail even if they do.

And the soldier responsible for this should be executed for treason. He knowingly and intentionally released thousands of classified documents which damage not only the security of the US but the image and our relationships with allies.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By thurston on 12/2/2010 7:47:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Personally I'm of the opinion that journalists who take classified information and publish it should not only be required to give up their source, but put in jail even if they do.


This is not surprising coming from a Nazi.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By thurston on 12/2/2010 7:53:51 PM , Rating: 1
What do you think we should do to vice presidents who out CIA operatives?


By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:17:23 AM , Rating: 1
"If someone gave you the encrypted access keys to military satellites so you could show, in real time, troops moving across the battlefield, would you air a special about it and show it? Including in the information exactly where those troops were?"

Yes, I would have shown My Lai.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By gescom on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By rcc on 12/2/2010 3:55:44 PM , Rating: 1
Well, we would. But then you bozos bitch and call us uncaring and isolationist, etc, etc, blah, blah.

It's not like we get anything positive out of the deal.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By gescom on 12/2/2010 6:53:42 PM , Rating: 1
You Should stay at home and leave us alone.
No bozos will bitch don't worry about it.
We have enough of your bombs and troops and violence and all shit of yours.
Just fakof.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By rcc on 12/3/2010 4:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
Could you get a petition please. Have everyone else sign it and I'm sure we can find a way to comply.

I'd ask which country you live in that "we" have violated so badly, but I doubt it would really accomplish anything.


RE: A Little More Evil Every Day
By lolmuly on 12/2/10, Rating: -1
By Skywalker123 on 12/3/2010 1:01:00 AM , Rating: 2
if the info is nothing new and not surprising, then how is it damaging to the U.S?


This is the problem with the US people -
By Dr of crap on 12/2/2010 10:37:40 AM , Rating: 2
Since when is the president not "my president"?
That statement is very recent. Even though you might not like his political party, or him as a person, he was elected and is our president, be that Bush or Obama, or the next guy!
I just read an article about China -
"long list of measures by which China had made stunning strides in technological innovation in the past decade, but said this was particularly the case on the clean-energy front, where “our Sputnik moment has arrived.” He said the United States must innovate or risk falling behind forever in high-speed power transmission, high-speed rail, advanced coal technologies, nuclear power, alternative energy vehicles, renewable energy and supercomputing."

If this was the age in which we needed to build Sputnik, we couldn't do it. We are a nation of lazy, it all about me, slobs. And the posts on here about needing to know "secret" info that the govt of ALL nations do is crazy.
The "greatest generation" was just that because they didn't question authority. They acted as needed to get the job done. And then didn't whine about not getting anything they deserved!
Any govt employee giving out these "leaked" documents should be punished as the govt sees fit!
AND YES, there is a lot of information that the govt NEEDED to keep from the general population from knowing. It only recently that we have info about WWII, or Korea, or Vietnam.

The golden age was just that, the way people should treat authority and be respetful of their elders. And the golder rule would work wonders for everyone.
And for the record - no I am not over 70. I am mid forties with two kids. Two kids that respect authority, and their elders, and have respect for their govt, even if we don't thing the elected ones are the right ones!




RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Kurz on 12/2/2010 10:55:36 AM , Rating: 2
Respecting Government is one thing, but approving of their actions is another.

How are we ever going to get a rein on the debt?
How are we ever going to end the never ending wars?
How are we going to get freedom back that we sacrificed for the illusion for security?
How are we going to end inflation tax the government keeps putting us for its reckless spending?

You have to have discussion and flat out oppose what the current officials are doing. The government has ballooned to a size never seen before. It has so many autonomous organizations that can pass laws and regulation.

Sorry I don't have the same respect for government as you do.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Dr of crap on 12/2/2010 12:14:43 PM , Rating: 2
Respecting the govt is one thing-
Believing the programs they sponser are needed is another.

I didn't say I'm for everything the govt does.
The intitlement programs they have dreamed up in the past 70 years are for the most part NOT needed and a waste of good tax money.
Debt spending and policing the world has been going on for about the same amount of time. My only caveat is where would we be if we'd stayed out of WWI, and WWII, or Korean conflict?
We also didn't need to bailout GM and Chrysler, but here we are in debt to our eyballs.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2010 12:29:25 PM , Rating: 3
What is this common sense I'm hearing?


By Dr of crap on 12/2/2010 12:59:18 PM , Rating: 2
You can't buy commone sense!
If you all used that gray matter as it should be, we'd be better off!


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 1:32:09 PM , Rating: 2
WWI would have ended on its own, it was mostly over by the time the US got involved.

WWII we did play a major role in, so that is an apt example.

Korea would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides of the war and there would be a single Korea, and it might not even be controlled by the current dictator. There are a lot of what/if scenarios associated with Korea. Look at Vietnam as an example of what could have happened had the US decided to not enter.

I don't want to think about how bad the economy would still be if we didn't bail out GM and Chrysler, at least in some locations it is coming back. Of course, those hit hardest by the recession are going to take more time to come back to the level they were at in 2004/5. It would help if we weren't fighting in two unending wars in two very distance locales in the world.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Danish1 on 12/3/2010 4:49:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
WWI would have ended on its own, it was mostly over by the time the US got involved.


No, the US entering the war was one of the major reasons why Germany eventually surrendered.

Also, the US suffered 323,018 casualties, 116,516 of those KIA in WW1 so I think you're being incredibly disrespectful to your countrymen who served when you claim it was almost over anyway.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/2010 5:44:48 AM , Rating: 2
No it wasn't. It was simply the icing on the cake.

If you think WWI wasn't going to end without the US you have a very shallow knowledge of history. In 1917 the British basically had it won with their block-cade.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Danish1 on 12/3/2010 2:11:24 PM , Rating: 2
No, it's your knowledge that's shallow. The war was far from over in 1917.
Read up on the battles of 1918. The French army was in a terrible state and Germany almost made it to Paris during their spring/summer offensives, with US divisions playing key roles in several battles.

The US army taking about 1/3rd of it's WW2 casualties in what amounts to about 6 months of WW1 fighting (April 1918-end) should tell you everything about the war not being over.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Anoxanmore on 12/3/2010 2:52:40 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it is yours that is lacking quite thoroughly. The UK had the war won and with Russia coming to their aid it would have ended probably another three years later(as opposed to 1.5 yrs).

The US entered the war in 1917.

I can't believe you'd even compare WWI to WWII. That just shows a complete lack of armed conflict history. The scope of the wars don't even compare.


By Just Tom on 12/3/2010 7:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
Are you claiming that the Russians were coming to the aid of the UK? Russia was already out of the war.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Danish1 on 12/4/2010 8:55:31 AM , Rating: 2
As I said it's your knowledge that's shallow. Russia left the war after the revolution in 1917, giving up pretty much all their european non-ethnical russian territories to the central powers in the peace deal and further more this allowed the germans to redeploy their eastern front to the west for the 1918 spring offensive, which is no insignifcant reason why the war was from from over when the US entered.

As for the US entering the war in 1917 then yes that's true but if you had read your history you'd know that US troops practically didn't enter the fighting until they were fully deployed in the spring of 1918, just in time for the German offensive I might add.

As for your strawman about the scope of the wars then it's just that. Grats on your win over yourself there I guess, what I compared though was US casualties not scopes.

and nice dodge the on the battles of 1918. I suggest you read a bit about the period before making anymore comments which belittles your serving countrymen of the time.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Skywalker123 on 12/5/2010 4:42:02 AM , Rating: 2
We had absolutely no business getting involved in WWI.The defeat of Germany in merely set the stage for WWII.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Just Tom on 12/5/2010 2:41:48 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize the Germans were sinking American ships?


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Skywalker123 on 12/5/2010 3:02:29 PM , Rating: 2
What American ships? Are you referring to the Lusitania? She was a British liner carrying American passengers. The Germans printed this warning before she sailed.

Notice!
Travellers intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that, in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travellers sailing in the war zone on the ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk.
Imperial German Embassy
Washington, D.C. 22nd April 1915


By Smilin on 12/7/2010 9:39:06 AM , Rating: 2
My grandpa used to eat bologna and mustard sandwiches then fart into the mustard gas canisters. He was responsible for probably a good 10-15% of the mustard gas used in all of WW I.

True story.


By Kurz on 12/2/2010 1:44:32 PM , Rating: 2
Good... for a moment there I thought you were for blindly following the government and all their policies.

We at least have more in common than I thought.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Reclaimer77 on 12/2/2010 7:26:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How are we ever going to end the never ending wars?


Never ending?

It's a common misconception that every generation feels like they are in violent times. But statistically and historically speaking, we're in a period of one of the LEAST savage in human history.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Kurz on 12/3/2010 8:12:02 AM , Rating: 2
Well... wars must at least be declared.
Since Vietnam we haven't done any declaring haven't we?

War is expensive and these past few years of war have been quite frivolous in my point of view. You may have stopped one or more terrorist organization though we probably going to have a couple new ones to join in the fight against mighty USA.


RE: This is the problem with the US people -
By Reclaimer77 on 12/3/2010 12:42:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well... wars must at least be declared. Since Vietnam we haven't done any declaring haven't we?


Yes but it isn't always our side that does the declaring. If you invade our allies, you're vis a vis declaring war. When you fly planes into the Twin Towers, you're damn sure declaring war on us.


By Kurz on 12/3/2010 2:55:49 PM , Rating: 2
Though was the evidance ever strong enough to link Al-Queda and Iraq or Afganistan?

Though about the allies part, entangling alliances are such a pain aren't they? Perhaps if there was more free trade in the world we wouldn't have to resort to such gang like tactics. Honestly, saying we'll be backing up a alliance nation gives our friends less incentive to settle their dissputes with their neighbors.


By Skywalker123 on 12/5/2010 4:48:49 AM , Rating: 2
Respect the government? LOL


Uhhh...
By Homerboy on 12/2/2010 9:21:32 AM , Rating: 4
Is Amazon gov't controlled, owned or operated?

If not, then it is ENTIRELY up to Amazon what they do with their servers and customers.

Can I host kiddie porn on Amazon without being shut down? Not to mention Wikileaks was already subjected to DDoS attack once (if not more). Who's to say they wont be again, and why would Amazon want to jeapoardize it's other 1000s of customers and network?

I don't see how this is "wrong" of Amazon at all, on ANY level.

Honestly, Wikileaks can go STFU.




RE: Uhhh...
By AnnihilatorX on 12/2/2010 9:24:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
According to The Seattle Times, Amazon was contacted by a Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee official who pressured the company to dump the site.


Erm if above is true then it is 'influenced' by the government.
It's not black and white is it.


RE: Uhhh...
By Homerboy on 12/2/2010 9:26:19 AM , Rating: 2
Honestly, I would be HEAVY money that "influenced" or not Amazon would have pulled Wikileaks regardless. What benefit does it serve them to host? A few pennies income a month? Versus the negative publicity for the hosting, let alone the impending DDoS attacks? Amazon has very little to gain out of hosting them.


RE: Uhhh...
By quiksilvr on 12/2/2010 9:33:56 AM , Rating: 2
Uh, I don't know about you, but I had no idea Amazon hosted them before this.

But now that I think about it, it makes sense to cut off the bad PR BEFORE people know than AFTER. Gotta watch out for that paypah!


RE: Uhhh...
By aegisofrime on 12/2/2010 10:07:39 AM , Rating: 2
From what was written in the article, Amazon isn't their primary host. After Wikileaks came under DDoS, it used Amazon's EC2 Cloud Computing server to act as a mirror or backup server so as to restore service.


RE: Uhhh...
By invidious on 12/2/2010 10:15:20 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
If not, then it is ENTIRELY up to Amazon what they do with their servers and customers.

Agreed, I can't stand idiots who think that corporations have some obligation to uphold free speach. Free speach only prevents the government from passing laws that restrict speach. It in no way grants individuals or organizations universal right to do whatever they want without consequences.


RE: Uhhh...
By adiposity on 12/2/2010 6:19:30 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, exactly. Like when Palin said the media's criticism of her amounted to limiting her "free speech."

Only the govt. can threaten the concept of "free speech." Everyone else can do what they like within the law to limit the effectiveness of your speech...including not repeating it for you, as Amazon is doing here.


RE: Uhhh...
By syphon on 12/2/2010 1:19:57 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. Amazon is a private company and can do what they want. Wikileaks is a very controversial site..not just with people, but with BIG business and Government.

If I were Amazon, and the US Government (who most likely hosts stuff with Amazon) came to me asking me not to host something, I would seriously think about removing it from my servers. Its funny how when you go against the Governments wishes how you get a really nasty IRS audit, and so on.

Wikileaks is about to release info on Bank of America and BP. You can be sure that if Amazon does any business with those companies and many that are loyal to them, that they could potentially loose a lot of business, not including those loyal to the USA that would take their business elsewhere.

As someone that uses Amazon's services for hosting, I would not like the idea of a site that is being targeted by multiple governments and corporations and being attacked to be sharing the same host as me. It would be a security risk to me.


RE: Uhhh...
By lolmuly on 12/2/2010 1:27:35 PM , Rating: 2
while it is true, it is amazons decision, and the whole first amendment thing was a dumb comment, it seems like amazon keeps making weaker and weaker decisions every day. They really need to pick a philosophy and stick to it, not just be everyone's b****


RE: Uhhh...
By rcc on 12/2/2010 4:00:04 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds to me like they did. The fact that you didn't like it is irrelevant.


Corrective actions
By frobizzle on 12/2/2010 10:38:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
One such analyst, a disgruntled soldier name Bradley Manning, was responsible for the recent leaks to Wikileaks, a move he made after he was demoted.

Releasing classified information without authorization is a treasonous act and the prescribed punishment for treason is execution.




RE: Corrective actions
By Anoxanmore on 12/2/2010 10:54:32 AM , Rating: 2
Unless the information released contains illegal acts, then it is not treason(for the whistle blower).

There are lines of gray with information accessed in the military.


RE: Corrective actions
By Smilin on 12/2/2010 1:38:30 PM , Rating: 2
True. However the documents released were a mix of black, white and gray.

He didn't just release the white, or even the gray.

It is very likely people died as the result of this information being disclosed. That is the purest essence of treason. Give the guy his day in court. If he's guilty and exhausts his appeals then hang him the old fashioned way. Hell it's treason..do it publicly for all I care.

Whistleblower was NOT this guys motive. He was just pissed.


RE: Corrective actions
By danobrega on 12/2/2010 3:20:44 PM , Rating: 2
Who is "this guy" you are speaking of?


RE: Corrective actions
By morphologia on 12/2/2010 3:34:24 PM , Rating: 2
I'm thinking Spc. Manning. Either that, or this poster has no idea what Wikileaks is. It's more than just Assange, it's his entire network of spiteful e-rabblerousers.


RE: Corrective actions
By danobrega on 12/3/2010 2:48:24 PM , Rating: 2
I asked because you can't consider Assange as a traitor. He's not from the USA.

If "the guy" is an American that leaked info, ok then. Do what you wish.

It's interesting though, that individuals can't have secrets to the government. They can't, for example, use cipher greater than what the government can break in communications. They will have to go though body screener in airports. There are cameras spying on people everywhere. On the other hand, when someone spills some "secrets" about what the government does, there is hanging involved.

Sounds like you're living in George Orwell's 1984. At least in 1984 they just brain washed them, instead of hanging them.


RE: Corrective actions
By Smilin on 12/6/2010 5:40:18 PM , Rating: 2
I'm aware Assange isn't from the US. I was talking about the US citizen that provided the info. It was treasonous.

As for 1984. Yeah we're already there man. You're living there right along with me.

Telescreens? Meh. I've got a camera, microphone, gps locator, and transmitter in my pocket. I've got a webcam and Kinect when they want to watch me at home.

MiniTrue? The ministry of truth won't need a whole army to alter information. We've got Google. Ever try to lookup a news article that you remember reading 5+ years ago? Go try it. IF you find it, it won't be easy. If it were edited you would have no proof.

NewSpeak? Yeah orwell got this one wrong. They won't delete words to remove them. They will drown those words in a sea of new ones. "jailbreak" "OMGWTFBBQ" "tweet" etc. I've even heard kids speaking in text shortcuts. C'mon someone has *said* L.O.L. to you at somepoint haven't they? When (outside of Zen and motorcycle) have you heard the word "gumption" recently? It's an old one with a positive meaning...and it's nearly gone from our vocabulary.

I'm all for freedom of information. I even support the IDEA of wikileaks. This isn't about freedom of information though. Assange and his crew have an anti-US agenda. That is what it is about. It saddens me with disappointment.

I bellyfeel sending the thought criminals off to joycamp would be doubleplusgood. Quack.


RE: Corrective actions
By Smilin on 12/6/2010 5:23:06 PM , Rating: 2
The same "guy" mentioned in the post I'm responding to. Make a leap man.


It has been said before, but just to clarify...
By SKiddywinks on 12/2/2010 9:01:00 PM , Rating: 2
for all those claiming Assange has a personal vendetta with the US; all information Wikileaks ever has access to is submitted by other people. I doubt many people from other countries leak much information about the USA, so the vast majority must be from US citizens, in which case someone who does know, deemed it important enough for everyone else to know.

So if a member of the US poplation decides everyone else in the US population should be able to see what they are seeing, that's somehow Assange's fault?

I have no doubt he has documents that relate entirely to countries other than the US, but to be fair, the US makes for an interesting discussion on just about everything, and I have no doubt he is sat on even more US leaks than he is releasing.

To be honest, I found the recent allegations against Russia far more interesting than anything the USA has done in Iraq or Afghanistan recently. That's all the same stuff but new.

Wikileaks is a very new variable to the world, I suggest we don't judge it just yet.




By mindless1 on 12/3/2010 9:09:15 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, just as it is biased for a journalist to present the facts on only one side of a story, so it is for Wikileaks to only present the US's *secrets*.

If I followed you around and taped everything you did in public to present it to others for their judgement, wouldn't it be considered harassment? This is harassment on a national level because the US doesn't suit Wikileaks' agenda.

It's not that other countries DO support their agenda so much as they are only interested in their shallow ideology that so long as some something hidden is uncovered it is automatically a /good/ thing to have happen.

In other words, we elect and train our officials to make a best effect to do what is beneficial to our well being and by that I mean each country. When something is deemed by these people as important for the public to know they release the info.

Granted there will always be dirty underhanded back room deals between *men* as they are imperfect, but two wrongs do not make a right... expose those who violate the law, not just spreading ill will around because everyone eventually says *something* that taken out of context, *someone* else could twist to seem worse than it was meant to be.

Sometimes no information is better than information released in a biased way meant to deceive people. Wikileaks sensationalizes information in an unfair manner as if suddenly war itself will end if we all know what is going on.

When there is a war, correct me if I am wrong, people know there is a war, yes? Did they think nobody dies? No. Did they think only evil men pay the price? No. There's nothing new here, just stirring up ill will towards their own agenda.

Shame on them!


RE: It has been said before, but just to clarify...
By Kurz on 12/4/2010 9:31:32 AM , Rating: 2
Absolute Power Absolutely corrupts.
Sorry I highly doubt we can trust our government to do anything besides enter wars and win them.


By Skywalker123 on 12/5/2010 4:50:29 AM , Rating: 2
We lost in Vietnam, we're gonna lose in Afghanistan.


RE: It has been said before, but just to clarify...
By Kurz on 12/5/2010 11:17:01 AM , Rating: 2
True except these were gorilla battles.
Armies have a hard time winning these.


By Skywalker123 on 12/5/2010 2:46:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yeh, its really tough to beat a gorilla!


By Kurz on 12/5/2010 5:52:46 PM , Rating: 2
Guerrilla Warfare is what I meant to post.


Paranoid?
By Wulf145 on 12/2/2010 9:25:16 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
...a site whose primary focus over the last several years has been against the U.S. government.


Strange, but every Government which has had Dokuments on Wikileaks has stated that this site is primaraly against that Government.




RE: Paranoid?
By R3T4rd on 12/2/2010 9:47:59 AM , Rating: 2
Wikileak does leak information about every government out there. But...really, 80%-90% of leaked documents and classified information from them has been on the US Government. Assange and his crypt of follwers does have something against the US. If WikiLeak was to be fair, we should see about the same amount of content for all the super power and or governments out there.

I 'd say this quote is 100% accurate.
quote:
...a site whose primary focus over the last several years has been against the U.S. government.


RE: Paranoid?
By VultureTX on 12/2/2010 9:58:48 AM , Rating: 2
Well then why don't you believe Julian Assange's own words then.
Go back and read his Counterpunch articles, check out his own leaks targets (note that almost all non british/american leaks were done by others on the staff ), hell just listen to his justifications.

And then actually look at the harm done versus the gain in embarrassing the US. It's not like any of this is actually leading to court charges against the US or it's people so far. He just goes around claiming unethical acts, but ignores or retreats for other's criminal acts.


Definition of incompetence
By Ammohunt on 12/2/2010 3:18:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
U.S. President Barack Obama has set up a special panel to assess the fallout of the leaked cables and determine steps to secure confidential government data better in the future.


When i read this the cover of the movie dumb and dumber flashed in my head.




RE: Definition of incompetence
By morphologia on 12/2/2010 3:39:04 PM , Rating: 1
Why? Because this is another Bush mess that Obama has to clean up? The unification of the intelligence networks was done under Bush, right after 9/11. Blaming Obama for the leaks is like blaming Nixon for the Vietnam War.

BTW, do you prefer the title "troll" or is "commentard" closer to home?


RE: Definition of incompetence
By Ammohunt on 12/2/2010 5:12:18 PM , Rating: 2
Nowhere did i place blame for the leaks where i do place balme is lack of any type of action towards these leaks hell a statement from the president would be something. All we have right now is egg on our face and Gibbs saying "we shouldn't be afraid of one man with a laptop and a web address" WHAT?


It is official
By morphologia on 12/2/2010 3:32:05 PM , Rating: 2
Wikileaks has gone from being a whistle-blowing organization to being a cyber-terrorism outfit. They aren't even trying to inform the citizenry...they're just trying to damage government relations. No one benefits in any practical way from the information they've provided, except those wanting to cause diplomatic problems or start a war.

Combine their extortion tactics with the media outlets and their threatening statements in which they indicate their desire to damage or even "bring down" both governments and now financial institutions, they are essentially the perfect combination of the Weekly World News and al-Qaeda. There's no good intent here, just sensationalism and spite.

I'm really beginning to think that Assange thinks he's the Antichrist or something. Either that, or he's desperately starved for attention, even if it means scandal.




RE: It is official
By Kurz on 12/4/2010 9:29:08 AM , Rating: 2
I really wonder if you actually know what governments been up to with their policies, distortion, manipulation, propoganda. And you say wikileaks is all about sensationalism. Look at your government being sensationalist trying to keep your eyes off the ball as it hides it in different cups.

WOW I love your religious reference, oh Assange must think he is the false prophet sent to do satan's bidding.

Dang you really love our government don't you?


It's a sad day
By xplice on 12/2/2010 11:57:09 PM , Rating: 2
It's a sad day when DailyTech starts refering to wikileaks as a "cyberespionage organization" and "information terrorist organization"...

Come on DailyTech, thats a bit judgemental isn't it??




RE: It's a sad day
By The0ne on 12/3/2010 5:32:32 PM , Rating: 2
It's quite pathetic actually. Guilty even before anything.

Information is always a dual edge sword. There will always be people who use it in a good way and people that uses it in a bad way. That should not deter you and anyone else that wants to know the truth from the knowing. Worst of all is cherry picking what YOU and what you think others should know. Either live with the facts or avoid it all together, but don't go on telling others how they should do it.


By Ahnilated on 12/2/2010 11:23:40 AM , Rating: 1
>Wrong, if you chose to live in America you chose to give the >government a certain amount of control. You dont get to know whatever >you want because that is a security risk to the rest of us. Read the >constitution before you go blathering on about what rights you think >you have.

I really think you need to read the constitution. The Govt that we currently have is NOT the one professed in the original constitution but a corporation that took over many years ago. Go to your local law library and look it up of you don't believe me. They are a bunch of crooked thieves that are robbing the people of America blind and if you disagree they jail you. They don't want their nasty little secrets out in the open because the people might rise up against them and remove all the bankers (who actually control this country) (look it up, see IMF). This country hasn't been free for over 50 yrs and they are slow boiling the people with rules to enslave us. Very soon it will be just like Germany was with people telling on other people to the SS so the bad people get put into prisons. They already have them built and calling them residential homes, but it has 2 layers of bobwire around them. This country alsos hasn't had a free election in as many years. See the constitution on how people are allowed to elect people not the poor excuse of elections now a days which are actually for people we do nothing to elect. See the statements about the electoral college and that the people are too stupid to elect anyone. I could go on and on.




By IamKindaHungry on 12/2/2010 12:46:07 PM , Rating: 2
This much of your response was on point...

quote:
I really think you need to read the constitution. The Govt that we currently have is NOT the one professed in the original constitution


After that, you seemed to drift off into some Glenn Beck nonsense babbling...


DT gets it
By Wererat on 12/2/2010 11:26:00 AM , Rating: 3
"The quote represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the first amendment"

Correct; the right to free speech does not obligate any publisher or owner of publishing means to assist the speaker.

(non-net example: I do not have the right to spraypaint my political opinion on my neighbor's house).




What goes around...
By Beenthere on 12/2/2010 10:22:38 AM , Rating: 2
I'm hoping they prosecute for the damage doen by the intentional leaks. There is no means to undue the damage.




Hypocrisy rears its ugly head...
By IamKindaHungry on 12/2/10, Rating: 0
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2010 12:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah the Chinese and North Koreans would have him killed. Not have him arrested.


they sound like 'merricans.
By Smilin on 12/2/2010 1:21:55 PM , Rating: 2
These guys understand our constitution about as well as Sarah Palin or Christine O'donnell.

1. You're not a 'merrican there Assange. You don't get protections under our constitution.
2. If you were you would be executed for treason (which our constitution includes provisions for)
3. Our constitutional protections are to protect citizens from the govornment, not to protect them from corporations. Amazon cannot violate your rights (even if you were a citizen)
4. Amazon's (or more specifically it's shareholders as recently highlighted in an unpopular supreme court decision) rights to free speech ARE protected. This includes them giving you the middle finger.
5. *IF* amazon were the govornment and decided to restrict your free speech then it would not violate the constitution as this is a very obvious matter of national security and the supreme court has repeatedly made this distinction.

Assange you can now go back to wringing your hands about the horrible evils of our country. Ignore the fact that despite our flaws we remain a beacon of freedom in this world. Oh and your claims of doing this for free speech and freedom in general are wearing pretty thin. It's obvious your agenda is purely anti-american (just had to get that one more little snipe in about giving money to europe didn't you?).




Your/you're
By CZroe on 12/2/2010 1:57:03 PM , Rating: 2
"...it's perfectly legal in the U.S. for businesses to kick you out and deny you access to their property if they don't like what your saying."

YOU'RE




Pedophilia
By The Raven on 12/2/2010 2:26:46 PM , Rating: 2
I'm surprised pedophilia wasn't mentioned during this talk of censorship in light of the recent events at Amazon lol.




Protection and the Constitution
By avxo on 12/2/2010 10:36:09 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the government from infringing on your free speech


The First Amendment doesn't protect the Government from anything. It does, however, prevent it from abridging the freedom of speech. Words have meaning Jason.




"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki