US slams 'criminals' behind WikiLeaks

Nalano said:
When a quarter-million American diplomatic missives are exposed for the world to see, it's about America. It affects the American people. Ergo, in this case, it very much is about the American people.

And what do you think Assange's motive is?

What elected body commissioned him?

Where is the line of representation between him and the American people?
Click to expand...

No, the missives are of diplomatic nature and are between the american government and other nations representatives. They affect these other nations as much.

I don't know Julian Assange, so I won't speculate about his motives. All I can assume is that his motives are to keep a whistleblower/news-group going.

Who do you go to vote for for more government transparancy?

Crni Vuk said:
No, but it would be nice to know how he made his "money" in the past, as he said over the internet and more then enough to remain independ. Now I am curious what does this mean "in the internet?".

Assanage is a rather questionable character in my eyes. Even if not a criminal but I have my doubts that the decision what is a secret and what not should not be left to him. Or his assistants for that matter.
Click to expand...

I have no idea, but jumping to the conclusion that his money is ill-gotten might be a bit far out. He might've gotten his money as an IT-consultant, stock exchanges or something similar.

Well, the Us government has proven in the past that they're not all keen on playing with an open hand. If I have to choose between Wikileaks or trusting the government I know what I would choose myself.
 
what would be hilarius is if the govt stated that they were not authentic

of course the stance would then be what were the authentic documents, and how can they prove they are not authentic


so here is the problem...

1) what level of confidence do we have that these are authentic?

everything on the internet is true right?

2) if the US govt stated these are not authentic, what kind of proof would be required and/or accepted to disprove these?

its not true because they say it isnt!

3) is it worth their time/effort to prove/argue they are not authentic?

if the time/effort expended trying to disprove these is more than the loss, why even bother?
 
TheWesDude said:
what would be hilarius is if the govt stated that they were not authentic

of course the stance would then be what were the authentic documents, and how can they prove they are not authentic


so here is the problem...

1) what level of confidence do we have that these are authentic?

everything on the internet is true right?

2) if the US govt stated these are not authentic, what kind of proof would be required and/or accepted to disprove these?

its not true because they say it isnt!

3) is it worth their time/effort to prove/argue they are not authentic?

if the time/effort expended trying to disprove these is more than the loss, why even bother?
Click to expand...

I think the fact that the government is making such a big deal about them is proof enough that they are authentic. They don't try to shut your website down and get you arrested if you are making up fake information that demonizes them, otherwise Alex Jones would have been in jail a long time ago.
 
Either way, leaking of Classified Material is bad/ People do not have the rights to know everything that the government is doing. Sure there are cover ups that should be known. However for those idiots out there that believe there should be freedom of all information that the government is doing then you are just stupid. Think of it like a game of chess, if your opponent knew what you were doing/going to do then you would be easily defeated. Think of all the secrets sold over the last decade, do you know how much it has hurt the capabilities of the US to work at top performance? How much money has gone to waste ... I'd like to put out that YEARS of progress and Hundreds of Billions of OUR money is wasted when secretes get out.

Think about WWII ... if the Japanese knew we were using Navajo Indians to communicate back and fourth then the Japanese could have beaten us and the USA may or may not be here today. At the least we would not be nearly as strong of a country we are today.
 
A few years back a guy got arrested because his neighbour called the police, because the man was having sex with his garden table.

The neighbour was purposley snooping, and took pictures, the guys family found out.

The US government, is the guy having sex with the table here, and Wikileaks is the snooping neighbour. Hey, you got caught out guys.
 
Being a public nuisance is one thing, that affects the public at large. That affects average joe or his family cause children see that shit.

Again people don't give a rats ass about diplomatic missives. These are for diplomats only. If our government decides to blackmail lets say some UK politician, its for our benefit. What wikileaks did was fuck that up because Assange wants to feel important, get the spotlight and otherwise be a high horsing ass.

As said before, go after the bigwigs and take THEM down. Stop screwing innocent folks over for following orders.

PS: Think about Batman. He does whats right not for glory or publicity but because he is JUST. People know about him but don't really know the true identity. Folks still believe Bruce Wayne is some stupid idiot fucko yuppy.
 
So those men and women chose to join the military to serve their country.

They get orders from up high that they have some pow/detainees incoming who need to be "questioned".

So they decide to follow orders. Either that or get dishonorably discharged or worse. Dis-obeying oders is not a light transgression.

And you prove my point. High and mighty naive folks who can only point the finger of blame. Those folks in the military do the job that most of us normies cannot hack or do not want to do. When they get questionable orders they are the ones who get stuck with following them.

And second, who the heck are you/wikileaks to judge these folks in uniform? Are you well versed in legal matters? Do you know the same amount of information as the joint chiefs or the president or multiple high level commanders?

Then you get these wikileaks folks who are too weak or not passionate/ruthless enough to take down teh TRUE mastermind assholes.
 
I never said we shouldn't take down the higher up people. But if someone gets ordered to torture someone they should be held accountable.
 
34thcell said:
No trust required, as long as they release (confirmed) authentic documents.
Click to expand...
I dont thrust assanage more then I would any gouvernement to say that. But I can only talk for the German one. And I think we have many people here which are much more reliable and thrustworthy then him personaly. Why ? Because they have some authority above them. Who actualy has Assanage to to give account actually ? Thats the main issue in my eyes.

DarkCorp said:
So those men and women chose to join the military to serve their country.

They get orders from up high that they have some pow/detainees incoming who need to be "questioned".

So they decide to follow orders. Either that or get dishonorably discharged or worse. Dis-obeying oders is not a light transgression.
Click to expand...
Not in the US military. You have the right to dissobey orders when they for example violate the geneva concention or basic human rights which also counts for the US military.
 
DasCryborg said:
Either way, leaking of Classified Material is bad/ People do not have the rights to know everything that the government is doing.
Click to expand...

Um we do actually, the people own the government so we should know what they are doing. We elect them and pay for it after all.
:V
 
Alphadrop said:
DasCryborg said:
Either way, leaking of Classified Material is bad/ People do not have the rights to know everything that the government is doing.
Click to expand...

Um we do actually, the people own the government so we should know what they are doing. We elect them and pay for it after all.
:V
Click to expand...
Now thats a bit naive. YOu have to remember one thing. The people which are "part" of this secret are part of the people which support the gouvernement as well.

For example, If I would be some inteligence officer, soldier, or even just working in some office I would not want that the public knows "my" name for example. Just for things that are my job. I mean we are talking here about legal actions. Not coruption. Thats a different case and ilegal anyway and there are ways how to deal with that. We dont need someone like Assanage to tell us "look at them! They do wrong things! They are evil mkay?". This is nothing new. And nothing Assanage and his lilde group have revelead showed anything new about our gouvernements. War crimes in a war zone ? OMG! How shocking, yes. But new ? no. Now letz say they would find some informations that Obama molested a child and ordered the secret service to silence the victim ... now we are talking about something really ground breaking ;). BUt I think only someone like wesleay snipes could reveal that !

Murder-at-1600.jpg



What I like about it is what Wikipedia tells about Wikileaks. That it started for the chinese citizens to show here informations and give them a platform.

But to reveal any secret to the public just because they think they have a "right" would be also against the rights of the individual. You cant just tell everything. I mean
 
Mettle said:
I don't know Julian Assange, so I won't speculate about his motives. All I can assume is that his motives are to keep a whistleblower/news-group going.
Click to expand...

"I'm not going to speculate about his motives, so here's my speculations."

You see the irony, no?

You don't know who Assange is. Releasing American diplomatic records for the sake of doing so, without a specific reason for whistle-blowing, is at best a sorely misguided interpretation of what the American people deserve to know and at worst a concerted effort to undermine American diplomacy.

Diplomacy, for the large part, is not done in the open, for obvious reasons. It never really has been. The line between diplomacy and spying has always been blurred. Always. Unless America wants to act blindfolded in the diplomatic world by attempting to conduct totally open diplomacy, America cannot function like this.
 
Bad_Karma said:
So Assange wants that goverments and companies and whatnot make all informations they have available to everyone, while he himself isn't willing to make all his informations available.
And on top he looks like some Bond villian or bad movie villian?

I love this oh so hilarious world.
Click to expand...

His inforrmations? do you mean sources? If so he doesn't have to give them up.

If you mean personal information he doesn't have to give that up either, the 5th amendment and all also right to privacy (and a citizens privacy is different from a gov't or multinational corporation, I feel they should have to divulge somethings, not troop positions of course)
 
Crni Vuk said:
Not in the US military. You have the right to dissobey orders when they for example violate the geneva concention or basic human rights which also counts for the US military.
Click to expand...
Actually folks in the US military are not to follow any illegal order, that includes more than the Geneva convention and human rights. I'm pretty sure it's their duty not to follow such an order.
 
thats what I assume as well, sadly many forget that part and think the military is "only" about orders. No good military is only about that.
 
thegaresexperience said:
Bad_Karma said:
So Assange wants that goverments and companies and whatnot make all informations they have available to everyone, while he himself isn't willing to make all his informations available.
And on top he looks like some Bond villian or bad movie villian?

I love this oh so hilarious world.
Click to expand...

His inforrmations? do you mean sources? If so he doesn't have to give them up.
Click to expand...
Also, who would leak information to Wikileaks if they'd be in danger of getting caught and subsequently suicided fo leaking?
I really don't see how everyone is getting so riled up on Assange. He isn't Wikileaks alone, and suiciding him won't change anything.
Also, he just puts out the information he gets from other people. He doesn't beg for information. Those being "traitors" and "attackers" (oh, those wacky dramaqueens) are the people gathering the information and willing to make them accessible to the public.
Wikileaks gives them the chance to do that without repercussions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top