lets discuss Wikileak

Yeah, he does strike me as a bit of a douche, but really is that unexpected?

How Obama feels about all this
"open and transparent government is something that the President believes is truly important. But the stealing of classified information and its dissemination is a crime"

lol oops not THAT open and transparent!

I don't know if I should like this Assange dude or not, he is smart but also arrogant, he is on one side a brave dude, but on the other hand he could anger a dead rock,

TODDLER wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: If the information doesn't help or hurt anybody then isn't it better to have it than not to have it?  I don't know. My imagination is running wild with this lately. It feels dangerous to me. Or maybe, I feel shocked by the news cast itself. I can't put my finger on it but, for some unknown reason or gut feeling, it disturbs me.

As long as the information doesn't flat out deliver our soldiers into the hands of our enemies, I would rather have it out in the open. I don't like the ease with which the Feds can cover up their actions.

Henry Plainview wrote: I'm afraid Toddler that the person who leaked it is the one who committed the crime, although an adept lawyer could probably pin something on him if he ever entered US jurisdiction, and not just for the bizarre rape thing. Assange really is a smug jerk, though, I don't see how this really helps anybody. Diplomats are being two-faced? Why I never! More importantly, however, I can't forgive him for releasing the real names of the Afghan and Iraqi native informants and then blaming the military for not sufficiently protecting them if they were to get murdered.

I'm afraid Toddler that the person who leaked it is the one who committed the crime, although an adept lawyer could probably pin something on him if he ever entered US jurisdiction, and not just for the bizarre rape thing. Assange really is a smug jerk, though, I don't see how this really helps anybody. Diplomats are being two-faced? Why I never! More importantly, however, I can't forgive him for releasing the real names of the Afghan and Iraqi native informants and then blaming the military for not sufficiently protecting them if they were to get murdered. 

When I saw the film of President Obama being questioned on this topic, he cracked that famous smile of his and said nothing. The first question which entered my mind was .....but, what does that mean? What does that sacastic looking smile mean? I started reading into it too much. I don't know. I watched Bill O'Reilly tonight and he covered the issue for about 15 minutes. I agree with his point totally and it's a little selfish on my behalf but, out of honesty, I watch him because I agree with him most of the time but, meanwhile back at the ranch journalists have a tendency to rub me wrong. Anything for a story of the sensational. Once the press gets a hold of a story such as this one, on a weekly basis it becomes a real circus. Then you have to start thinking for yourself.....as you want to do that anyway...but, now the story has exploded and caused controversal issues to go skyrocketing and the press wants that because it's good ratings. When this happens or everytime it happens, I become confused and can no longer follow the story or don't desire to. It can be straight foward diplomatic and you, the viewer gets sucked in....however, the views presented by individuals who promote Wikileak or defend it are confusing the hell out of me. They mention how names of officials were taken off or wiped from this list. Then they make claims about Wikileak revealing what is defined as TRUTH. While O'Reilly states plain and simple that they are giving America's secrets away. How can it really be that controversal? I mean, that's what the show is all about ....controversal issues...correct? But then it's controversal with cilvilians all the way down the line. From Harvard lawyers to factory workers. They all crack that smile and disgree with B.O'Reilly. The guy commited a crime. It needs to be addressed by our goverment. What's so funny about that?  

Slartibartfast wrote: 3. North Korea supplied Iran with long-range missiles.

Aww man that's really going to hurt our North Korean relations.


Edited by stonebeard - November 30 2010 at 20:31

 damn just lost my entire reply...................maybe wikileaks can retrieve it for me

The huge amount of documents, a multifold of what the most curious people would ever want to read, makes me think that the last leaks have been caused deliberately with the sub rosa approval of the U.S. government. I just try to guess for what purpose.

Yeah, on one hand it is good to have all this info out there, that's always good.
But, it could harm innocent people and frankly, Negoba is right.

Very little of all this has been news. Even that original big video, that baghdad airstrike I thought was some cover up...apparently it was known it happened at the time!
Huzzah for leaking known information and endangering innocent people!