• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wikileaks is an enemy of the United States

Unabogie said:
By the way, should the murder of Assange be classified as well? This would be a marvelous precedent. The CIA classifies information, which is then leaked to a journalist. That journalist is then murdered by the CIA and that information is classified. The next journalist learns of this murder and is them himself murdered. And that murder is classified. This is a fine way to run a democracy, I'm sure you'll all agree! We could have a system in which people just disappear as the government sees fits, with no one the wiser! It's so crazy it just might work!
Click to expand...

Sure. Just ask the Soviets.
 
Ausmerican said:
Heres another solution. Come up with a way that our intelligence services can be better at what they do than an Australian computer programmer. You know, stuff like keeping secret stuff secret.
Click to expand...
One way to keep information secret is by making sure everyone who has to know about it agrees it should be kept secret.

The more information is classified "secret", the more people need to be cleared for such - more people = more leaks.
Simultaneously, the more common the "secret" label becomes, the more often it will be used to protect dumb official's careers/reputations or to hide immoral behaviour, instead of for information that's really important to the nation's interests. That causes leaks too.
 
Ryokan said:
What if the leaks show that the politicians didn't act in the best interest of the American people, but rather the reverse? Wouldn't you have liked to know? Or are elected politicians allowed to do whatever they want, as long as they're able to keep it secret? If they classify the information about it, does that mean they don't have to be held accountable? Sounds insane to me.
Click to expand...

To make this clear, I am personally fine with the release of accurate documents that can bring down any and all politicians who are corrupt or acting as if they were by any special assistance to corporations, etc. that is not very open/above board whether classified or not. Also, no problem with docs out on military crimes that do not of necessity include the below as part of same.

I am completely against reports or the release of any documents that give, with any specificity or accuracy, any information about US military capability, strategy, tactics, movements, material, weapons specifications or field ability or deficiencies, etc.
 
Unabogie said:
By the way, should the murder of Assange be classified as well? This would be a marvelous precedent. The CIA classifies information, which is then leaked to a journalist. That journalist is then murdered by the CIA and that information is classified. The next journalist learns of this murder and is them himself murdered. And that murder is classified. This is a fine way to run a democracy, I'm sure you'll all agree! We could have a system in which people just disappear as the government sees fits, with no one the wiser! It's so crazy it just might work!
Click to expand...

The CIA acts illegally all the time. Illegal by other nation's standards, not our own.

If the CIA is instructed to kill Assange by the President, it's not against U.S. law. Obama has already declared that an American Islamic Extremist can be targeted for death. Same thing here.

Your argument isn't just with me...it's with me and Obama.
 
deepatrax said:
The CIA acts illegally all the time. Illegal by other nation's standards, not our own.

If the CIA is instructed to kill Assange by the President, it's not against U.S. law. Obama has already declared that an American Islamic Extremist can be targeted for death. Same thing here.

Your argument isn't just with me...it's with me and Obama.
Click to expand...

The Illegal we do immediately. The Unconstitutional takes a little longer.
Henry Kissinger
 
fuelair said:
To make this clear, I am personally fine with the release of accurate documents that can bring down any and all politicians who are corrupt or acting as if they were by any special assistance to corporations, etc. that is not very open/above board whether classified or not. Also, no problem with docs out on military crimes that do not of necessity include the below as part of same.

I am completely against reports or the release of any documents that give, with any specificity or accuracy, any information about US military capability, strategy, tactics, movements, material, weapons specifications or field ability or deficiencies, etc.
Click to expand...

and there is the rub...

who gets to decide what's "illegal" in the info?

There are people who believe that the entire U.S. action in Iraq is illegal, so would allowing them to make decisions about the classification of U.S. Military troop movements there be ok? I think not.

How about this...

Releasing U.S. State secrets is illegal.

If you do so and the secrets you release show NO illegal activities, then you get prosecuted and the conduit for the release of the documents gets labeled an Enemy of the U.S.

so, if you choose to release classified info...do so wisely...your life depends on it.
 
fuelair said:
I am completely against reports or the release of any documents that give, with any specificity or accuracy, any information about US military capability, strategy, tactics, movements, material, weapons specifications or field ability or deficiencies, etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed - but re this leak, none of the disclosed documents so far seem to have done any of the above. They have merely indicated the connivance of diplomacy. Any historian will tell you, I am pretty sure, that this is old hat and par for the course.

I think the main problem is not so much what information the leaks contain, but the timeliness, i.e. much earlier disclosures than we citizens are used to before, that is what is causing the stir.
 
Belgian thought said:
Agreed - but re this leak, none of the disclosed documents so far seem to have done any of the above. They have merely indicated the connivance of diplomacy. Any historian will tell you, I am pretty sure, that this is old hat and par for the course.

I think the main problem is not so much what information the leaks contain, but the timeliness, i.e. much earlier disclosures than we citizens are used to before, that is what is causing the stir.
Click to expand...

How's this...

If you release classified info which shows no illegal activities, then:
- If you're an American, you get prosecuted
- If you're a non-American, you get labeled an "Enemy of the U.S." with all the benefits that entails
 
deepatrax said:
Although I didn't say "we"...I assume you're refering to "our own"?

The people we elect to serve in public office.

A government of, by and for the people.
Click to expand...

Sorry. But what happened at Abu Ghraib happened in my name, and I did not approve. This person resents this kind of stupidity being carried out, and wants it revealed so it never happens again.
 
fuelair said:
To make this clear, I am personally fine with the release of accurate documents that can bring down any and all politicians who are corrupt or acting as if they were by any special assistance to corporations, etc. that is not very open/above board whether classified or not. Also, no problem with docs out on military crimes that do not of necessity include the below as part of same.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I am completely against reports or the release of any documents that give, with any specificity or accuracy, any information about US military capability, strategy, tactics, movements, material, weapons specifications or field ability or deficiencies, etc.
Click to expand...
Agreed as well, but there is a gray area.
For example, what about information about the US military supplying arms to the terrorist PKK?
I don't think that falls under warcrimes and it's part of the US military strategy to be friendly with the Kurds in Iraq.
It's still the kind of information I want exposed, because it directly concerns how the US considers its allies (Turkey).
 
egslim said:
Agreed.


Agreed as well, but there is a gray area.
For example, what about information about the US military supplying arms to the terrorist PKK?
I don't think that falls under warcrimes and it's part of the US military strategy to be friendly with the Kurds in Iraq.
It's still the kind of information I want exposed, because it directly concerns how the US considers its allies (Turkey).
Click to expand...

you don't get to decide which info gets exposed.
Neither does Assange.

We elect people to do that.

And if it gets leaked and turns out NOT to document illegal activities...then those responsible for the leak should be held accountable.
 
fuelair said:
I am completely against reports or the release of any documents that give, with any specificity or accuracy, any information about US military capability, strategy, tactics, movements, material, weapons specifications or field ability or deficiencies, etc.
Click to expand...

Is this statement underlying the claim of "putting American lives at risk" that has been bandied about?

If it is, I would like to see the justification for the link. If the second, more specific claim about "lives at risk" is the standard, I would like to see where in the cables this has been done. I have not read them all, but I cannot find what I would consider the smoking gun here.

My question was inspired by the post I quoted, but I am not directing my question to the poster specifically (they didn't use the "at risk" terminology) but to those who are claiming damage to U.S. interests.

I know that the U.S. politicos are claiming damage, I just want to see a specific example from the cables that demonstrates this. As I recall, the previous release of information about Iraq involved some backpedaling on this very issue of harm.
 
deepatrax said:
Although I didn't say "we"...I assume you're refering to "our own"?

The people we elect to serve in public office.

A government of, by and for the people.
Click to expand...

'For the people'? Indiscriminate censorship of anything they regard as uncomfortable and prosecuting anyone who uncovers it?

'For the people'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom