^Pussy. You can't have your cake and eat it too. America is evil. The rest of the world has known this for years. Only Americans are surprised.


[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 12:31 PM. Reason : .]

12/6/2010 12:28:10 PM

^ ?

12/6/2010 12:38:59 PM

Quote :

"Actually, this most recent release has shaken loose my opinion of WL, and in fact I can see myself actually landing on the other side of the fence now."

can't it be possible to evaluate the leaks for what they are rather than focusing (erroneously) on the public figure of the man behind wikileaks? This is precisely what the establishment wants; some distraction for you to pay attention to rather than their wrongdoing

12/6/2010 12:48:58 PM

Quote :

"can't it be possible to evaluate the leaks for what they are rather than focusing (erroneously) on the public figure of the man behind wikileaks? This is precisely what the establishment wants; some distraction for you to pay attention to rather than their wrongdoing"

This is an excellent point, and I believe you are correct that I am guilty of falling into the media craze the past day or two.

But - in my limited understanding - I don't see how this latest release contains evidence of any wrongdoing. Unlike other leaks which have should have indeed been released (and I'm glad they were), this particular one seems to contain speculative and analytical conclusions made by our government for the purpose of national security.

The question was whether or not there was an intrinsic value for this information to be released. I don't see any. At this point, I'm done "evaluating the content" and move onto evaluating the intentions of the WL.

12/6/2010 1:00:25 PM

Quality stuff:

http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2010/12/columbia-university-wikileaks/

Upstanding college students don't criticize the government. If you want any part of that 33% of our GDP that government forcefully takes from you then you better not be posting in this thread.

Quote :

"Columbia University warns students against Wikileaks 06 Dec 2010 Students at the US’s Columbia University have been warned that reading or sharing information from the Wikileaks Cablegate documents could jeopardise employment prospects with the State department and other government agencies. The email from the Office of Career Services told students that “Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government.” Full text of email From: Office of Career Services Date: Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 3:26 PM Subject: Wikileaks – Advice from an alum To: “Office of Career Services (OCS)” Hi students, We received a call today from a SIPA alumnus who is working at the State Department. He asked us to pass along the following information to anyone who will be applying for jobs in the federal government, since all would require a background investigation and in some instances a security clearance. The documents released during the past few months through Wikileaks are still considered classified documents. He recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter. Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government. Regards, Office of Career Services"

12/6/2010 1:58:15 PM

Quote :

"But - in my limited understanding - "

Quote :

"At this point, I'm done "evaluating the content""

wtf

12/6/2010 2:09:41 PM

I do not work for the federal government, nor have I ever. Never done any work in or for the military. Never dealt with confidential federal documents. Never been involved with international diplomacy, or with counter-terrorist efforts.

"Limited understanding" is a qualifier that is intended to demonstrate some humility in this discussion and make it clear that I'm always open to further education.

I have only the media to explain to me exactly how this list of flagged critical locations could be used by our enemies, if at all.

Thus, I've done the assessment that I can, but continue to be open to more information or perspectives.

12/6/2010 2:26:38 PM

Why don't we move on to a much more serious and pressing matter...

The horrifying trend of adding "gate" to the end of every scandal.

12/6/2010 2:36:21 PM

update on ^^^^

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/06/columbia-university-walks_n_792684.html

12/6/2010 3:33:37 PM

Switzerland: Neutral No More, America's Lapdog
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11929034

12/6/2010 4:12:45 PM

Quote :

""Limited understanding" is a qualifier that is intended to demonstrate some humility in this discussion and make it clear that I'm always open to further education. I have only the media to explain to me exactly how this list of flagged critical locations could be used by our enemies, if at all. Thus, I've done the assessment that I can, but continue to be open to more information or perspectives."

Yes let the corporate controlled media tell you what to think about wikileaks

12/6/2010 4:24:19 PM

Quote :

"Yes let the corporate controlled media tell you what to think about wikileaks"

Why would I do that?

Ah, you misunderstood. I stated that I have only the media to explain the impact. What I did not type (because it was implied) is: "...if at all, so I have only my own inexperienced judgment to rely on."

Regardless, I recommend you take your own advice and turn your focus back to the content of the leaks.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 4:29 PM. Reason : ]

12/6/2010 4:27:17 PM

I dunno I'm wondering the same thing myself

12/6/2010 4:28:23 PM

^^



[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 4:30 PM. Reason : Ahhh....pretty sure I'm being trolled.]

12/6/2010 4:30:29 PM

Quote :

"I stated that I have only the media to explain the impact. What I did not type (because it was implied) is: "...if at all, so I have only my own inexperienced judgment to rely on." Regardless, I recommend you take your own advice and turn your focus back to the content of the leaks."

The leaks are interesting, I don't know how the majority of people aren't digging through them

12/6/2010 4:31:32 PM

Quote :

"The leaks are interesting, I don't know how the majority of people aren't digging through them"

Uh.....ok? That statement has nothing to do with this conversation, so I'm not sure if you meant to be closure or not.

In any event, it seems to me that this list of critical assets has no relevance to the public. Do you agree or not? And why? We have both established that we are disappointed in the media's handling of the past 1.5 weeks.

12/6/2010 4:34:25 PM

^^^^^^ That, or they've decided that threatening to destabilize international banks, potentially US branches of Swiss banks, is probably against their interests as a global banking center. Switzerland and its rather shady banking system thrives in part on secrecy after all, so I would imagine that someone behind a group that aims to overturn that whether for good or personal reasons, would be considered a threat.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 4:36 PM. Reason : Added more arrows...]

12/6/2010 4:36:18 PM

The army using LSD on American soldiers has no relevance to the public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA

Maybe that's why information about these crimes is still classified after 50 years and lawsuits to uncover them are still underway.

Wikileaks gets a leak, they leak it. They can't pick and choose or decide relevance. It's an all or nothing approach, otherwise becomes as culpable as the governments they expose. The only recourse of free nations is to not have anything to hide.

12/6/2010 4:41:28 PM

Quote :

"Wikileaks gets a leak, they leak it. They can't pick and choose or decide relevance. It's an all or nothing approach, otherwise becomes as culpable as the governments they expose."

Very true.

Quote :

" The only recourse of free nations is to not have anything to hide."

Is this a realistic approach in anything other than a world containing 100% free nations with no ulterior motives?

12/6/2010 4:43:52 PM

It's the duty of nations that want to maintain the moral high ground. Americans shouldn't torture. Americans shouldn't manipulate foreign nations to the detriment of their citizens. It boggles my mind that this form of corruption isn't exposed from the inside by good, decent American citizens and soldiers, but instead requires the intervention of a foreign journalist at great risk to his own life.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 4:50 PM. Reason : Are we really this lost?]

12/6/2010 4:49:13 PM

Does anyone know where to find the encrypted file that you will get the key too if something happens to Assange?

12/6/2010 6:02:28 PM

^ Given the United States willingness to persecute over this information are you sure you want it?

12/6/2010 6:26:16 PM

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5728614/Wikileaks__insurance__file

Don't worry, I'm sure it just contains lollipops and puppy dogs. A gigabyte of kittens.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 6:33 PM. Reason : .]

12/6/2010 6:32:01 PM

I can understand the concern and many folks on here's disdain at the wikileaks scandal.

Regardless I find it very much more DISTURBING and WORRISOME at the extent to which the government is trying to this shit up and Censor wikileaks. Sure the censoring is being done by Amazon and Twitter but I find it hard to believe that the CEO of Amazon shut down the server merely because he thought it was their public duty. Also, I find it highly probable that there is political pressure keeping the media from deviating from burning Assange at the stake instead of analyzing the "leaks."

I really start to wonder about this "free" society, when so much effort is spent covering up the "leaks."

Quote :

"It's the duty of nations that want to maintain the moral high ground. Americans shouldn't torture. Americans shouldn't manipulate foreign nations to the detriment of their citizens. It boggles my mind that this form of corruption isn't exposed from the inside by good, decent American citizens and soldiers, but instead requires the intervention of a foreign journalist at great risk to his own life. "

Agreed

Quote :

"Given the United States willingness to persecute over this information are you sure you want it?"

Do they? Last time i checked this should be safeguarded by the 1st amendment. Unless we as a country truly have begun wiping our asses with the constitution.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 6:37 PM. Reason : l]

12/6/2010 6:35:44 PM

Quote :

"Do they? Last time i checked this should be safeguarded by the 1st amendment. Unless we as a country truly have begun wiping our asses with the constitution. "

Quote :

"Students at the US’s Columbia University have been warned that reading or sharing information from the Wikileaks Cablegate documents could jeopardise employment prospects with the State department and other government agencies. The email from the Office of Career Services told students that “Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government.”"

Threatening to deny employment because of reading, Putting pressure on media outlets, I won't be at all surprised if Assange winds up dead. I would say the US has been using the constitution as TP for quite a while now all under the guise of "national security".

12/6/2010 7:12:49 PM

^ Well said!

12/6/2010 8:31:51 PM

Interesting that Assrange is so secretive himself when he's so big on transparency.

I mean, surely nobody should hide anything, isn't that what he's saying? Why is he moving from place to place and putting all his finances in hard to find accounts?

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM. Reason : ]

12/6/2010 8:53:07 PM

^ Jesus do you even read what you post? He is trying to keep himself and his sources safe.
Ask yourself a question. Who does it seem that the United States government is trying hardest to keep the information from? To me it looks like there has been a substantial attempt at a smear campaign and limiting of domestic access. Domestic access and attitudes should be the last thing they are concerned about if this is all information that is hidden for "national security reasons" but for some reason it is not. I wonder why?
Right now the American government looks guilty as hell.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 9:27 PM. Reason : asdfasd]

12/6/2010 9:21:06 PM

Quote :

"^ Jesus do you even read what you post? He is trying to keep himself and his sources safe. "

Wait, so you're saying that a state might use sensitive information to threaten the safety and interests of individuals? Fascinating!

But surely countries wouldn't do that to other countries, right?

12/6/2010 9:44:16 PM

Quote :

"To me it looks like there has been a substantial attempt at a smear campaign and limiting of domestic access."

i'd love to hear your theories as to how, exactly, the government is singling out and restricting solely domestic access to the documents, because, whatever your feelings about the government, that would be pretty goddamn a) amazing and b) pointless

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 10:02 PM. Reason : .]

12/6/2010 10:02:24 PM

the latest leak/threat of our weapons stashes/strategic important site bothers me. It really makes him sound much less pro information and much more anti-us.

12/6/2010 10:03:22 PM

Quote :

"Students at the US’s Columbia University have been warned that reading or sharing information from the Wikileaks Cablegate documents could jeopardise employment prospects with the State department and other government agencies. The email from the Office of Career Services told students that “Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government."

How is anyone surprised by this? Doing illegal shit, as far as I can remember, has jeopardized your ability to get jobs.
If someone has a criminal record for selling drugs, murdering, robbing, etc.... that record gets accessed and reviewed when that person applies for jobs, wants to rent an apartment, wants to get a loan, etc...
Accessing classified documents via computer is illegal. Having classified documents on an unclassified computer and/or network is illegal. Sharing classified data illegally is... gasp... illegal. As has been mentioned before, just because this information has been leaked, does not declassify it.

So why would this NOT jeopardize potential jobs? Especially, if those jobs often require strict adherence to the rules for handling classified data? In this case, the person that accessed/mishandled classified data has already shown that they are not capable of handling the data and information correctly.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 10:13 PM. Reason : MOAR]

12/6/2010 10:11:54 PM

^ it's the same thing as downloading music.

it's illegal, but everyone does it, it's hard to prove, and no one really asks questions.

It's unreasonable to expect people not to hear about the documents, when you see headlines on Google News describing what's in them.

If you're smart, you'll just say "no" if anyone asks if you've seen them.

12/6/2010 10:15:03 PM

Quote :

"the latest leak/threat of our weapons stashes/strategic important site bothers me. It really makes him sound much less pro information and much more anti-us."

agreed.

when the iraq and afghanistan leaks dropped, one could have initially presumed his aspirations were to expose blatant corruption, malfeasance, in the hopes of promoting justice and peace. A noble goal.

But, IMO, with the diplomatic cable leaks, and particularly the strategic interests index, it's becoming more and more self-evident that his goal is subversion of the US and our interests worldwide; legitimacy of his methods and severity of the consequences be damned. No one should be surprised that, given this, the government would seek to protect itself. The information was already classified for a reason, afterall. (hint: information is classified "secret" if it is determined such material would cause "grave damage" to national security if it were publicly available.)

Like I said earlier, ultimately he'll fail to bring about the change he's supposedly seeking, but he will have inadvertently wrought even more restriction to the flow of open, honest, and capable information. So, everyone loses.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 10:31 PM. Reason : .]

12/6/2010 10:22:15 PM

Hearing about the classified documents, and reading articles written about the documents, is not illegal.

Actively Accessing/Reading the documents is illegal.


Did....did I just blow your mind?

12/6/2010 10:23:33 PM

snitches get stitches

12/6/2010 10:39:23 PM

Quote :

"Hearing about the classified documents, and reading articles written about the documents, is not illegal. Actively Accessing/Reading the documents is illegal. Did....did I just blow your mind?"

Massa says don't access the files

12/6/2010 10:49:18 PM

^


[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 11:16 PM. Reason : .]

12/6/2010 11:16:13 PM

Quote :

"So why would this NOT jeopardize potential jobs? Especially, if those jobs often require strict adherence to the rules for handling classified data? In this case, the person that accessed/mishandled classified data has already shown that they are not capable of handling the data and information correctly."

Some pimply faced 19 year old reading about Hillary talking shit about Iran to the Saudi King on wikileaks
that has been made public for 6 Billion people to read, is completely different than being trusted with confidential material as a
hired government employee given a security clearance.

This is like saying that if someone publishes online the recipe for coca-cola, by reading the document even though it should be protected as
proprietary information should exclude one from down the road being hired for a job with Cisco in which one may have confidential document regarding a
top of the line router.

[Edited on December 6, 2010 at 11:23 PM. Reason : l]

12/6/2010 11:23:16 PM

Wikileaks Confirms Saddam's Story - US Diplomat Told Him It Was OK To Invade Kuwait

Saddam, confused by America's response, released this conversation a few weeks after the invasion. The Wikileaks cables have now confirmed it.
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/23/world/confrontation-in-the-gulf-excerpts-from-iraqi-document-on-meeting-with-us-envoy.html

12/6/2010 11:50:34 PM

Quote :

"i'd love to hear your theories as to how, exactly, the government is singling out and restricting solely domestic access to the documents, because, whatever your feelings about the government, that would be pretty goddamn a) amazing and b) pointless "

Yeah it should be pointless but a lot of US media outlets are buying into the Wikkileaks=terrorism=threat to national security. Not seeing that questions by the US media. Also the level of attacks upon Assange has recently intensified immediately after the announcement that the next leak was going to ruin a "major bank" again doesn't sound like they are out to protect "national security" does it? Finally they are trying to discourage people from reading the information themselves by threatening their ability to find employment if they do. Sounds like a lot of concern is being centered on domestic access/issues to me.

^Old news really. But damaging.

[Edited on December 7, 2010 at 12:38 AM. Reason : adfsaf]

12/7/2010 12:37:03 AM

Quote :

"Finally they are trying to discourage people from reading the information themselves by threatening their ability to find employment if they do."

They are only threatening their ability to find work with government organizations, which makes a lot of sense. These government employers would be mad at you for smoking weed so how much more do you think they would negatively view accessing and disseminating classified information? It seems like a moot point to me anyway because how many people out of the ones sharing this information do you think are actively trying to work for the government anyway?

12/7/2010 12:58:27 AM

a-rrested

12/7/2010 6:08:28 AM

serious question - have any arrests been made from the crime and corruption exposed by either round of leaks? (not people leaking the information, but arrests made from the evidence provided in the leaks)

12/7/2010 8:33:37 AM

what, exactly, is the list of crimes committed?

[Edited on December 7, 2010 at 9:16 AM. Reason : .]

12/7/2010 9:16:27 AM

yes I shouldve put alleged crime and corruption.

for all of the whistle-blowing and the bad shit being exposed (according to Assange and posters here), there doesnt seem to be much in the way of indictments, public outcry or resignations, etc....

12/7/2010 9:43:17 AM

"Wikileaks' Julian Assange was arrested today in Britain. The charges stem from an inquiry in Sweden, where he was accused of sex offenses.

"Officers from the Metropolitan Police extradition unit have this morning arrested Julian Assange on behalf of the Swedish authorities on suspicion of rape," the police said in a statement.

"Today's actions against our editor-in-chief Julian Assange won't affect our operations: we will release more cables tonight as normal," Wikileaks said on its Twitter account.

Assange was attending a scheduled meeting with police, following their announcement yesterday that 'all the paperwork' necessary to issue an arrest warrant had been received."

Basically Sweden (possibly at our behest) trumped up some sex charges so that Assange would be arrested.
For all of you Wikkileaks haters out there. According to Assange he asked the US government to help him redact the documents to protect the innocent. The US government refused. Does this sound like intelligent damage control to you? OHH and BTW the new york times confirms Assange's story even while trying to allege that he is lying.

[Edited on December 7, 2010 at 9:51 AM. Reason : http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/20/wikileaks]

[Edited on December 7, 2010 at 9:53 AM. Reason : that does a much better job explaining it than I have. ]

12/7/2010 9:48:31 AM

^ Trumped up charges to destroy him.

12/7/2010 10:04:28 AM

I notice the media is all like WIKILEAKS GUY IS ARRESTED!!!*






*He went to a police station and turned himself in on a charge unrelated to wikileaks.

12/7/2010 10:07:24 AM

The US government refused to redact those docs and then they go and claim that wikileaks has blood on THEIR hands

12/7/2010 10:08:21 AM