Classified Documents leaked

[highnote]

Any thoughts on the classified documents that were leaked and posted on Wikileaks?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/26/wikileaks-founder-on-afgh_n_659014.html

[delayjf]

Yes, why isn't somebody going to jail???

[Tom]

Good question. Charged with treason?

[Mike at A+]

If jail is being considered, how about the New York Times and what they did during the Bush administration?

[mostpost]

Yes, why isn't somebody going to jail???
It's a little early isn't it? The documents were only released last night. We are still required to have a trial in this country.

It occurs to me suddenly that when you say "Why isn't somebody going to jail???" you are referring to the people who leaked the documents, whereas I am thinking of the people who committed the war crimes. Allegedly in both cases.

[Hanover1]

Is anything they did/might reveal a surprise to anyone? Atrocities are committed by both sides during war, its the nature of the beast.
On the other hand, the penalty for treason is death, and rightly so, but I suspect it won't go that far...fighting "fair" against an opponent who will do anything to win is a losing proposition...see horseracing :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

If jail is being considered, how about the New York Times and what they did during the Bush administration?
Try to be more specific, there are so many examples of Republican paranoia it's hard to keep them straight.

[Mike at A+]

Try to be more specific, there are so many examples of Republican paranoia it's hard to keep them straight.
Google it wise ass. It's a fairly well known story. Even MSNBC gave it token coverage albeit from the "hate Bush" anti-war angle.

[delayjf]

I have to believe that to knowingly disclose classified information is against the law. As far as war crimes are concerned, if there is any evidence that civilians were intentionally targeted then fine, prosecute, but when the enemy wears no discernable uniform and hides among the civilian population...well, shite happens

[highnote]

but when the enemy wears no discernable uniform and hides among the civilian population...well, shite happens

That has been a big problem. I'm thinking Vietnam when it was hard to tell who was who.

During the American Revolution, I wonder if the British had trouble telling American civilians from American soldiers? Did American soldiers blend in with the local population -- or did soldiers wear uniforms? I know George Washington wore a uniform, but not sure about other American troops.

I googled "American Revolution Images" and many American soldiers did not appear to have a uniform. But did a lack of American uniforms cause the British any trouble?

[rastajenk]

Unies? Many of them didn't even have shoes.

In the siege of New York, the soldiers were in amongst the civilians, and when the bombs started flying, they weren't necessarily aimed at military encampments. They didn't have no stinkin' Geneva Conventions back then.

[highnote]

Unies? Many of them didn't even have shoes.

In the siege of New York, the soldiers were in amongst the civilians, and when the bombs started flying, they weren't necessarily aimed at military encampments. They didn't have no stinkin' Geneva Conventions back then.


I remember reading about the Revolutionary War and how the American troops didn't have boots or shoes had to use old rags wrapped around their feet.

[BluegrassProf]

Much of the intel in these documents is extremely sketchy - most of it is unverified or poor, and at times very likely fabricated outright by, for example, Afghani security forces (ex: some of the information is VERY precise, down to names and addresses...ironically, in the world of intelligence-gathering, the more specific information is, the less credible it becomes).

That said: I'm all for transparency, but as someone familiar w/ the process, I find this leak very problematic, particularly considering that the conflict is ongoing. It's one thing to release intel regarding a past conflict; it's another entirely when that intel speaks to current events, to scenarios actually playing out as we speak - I consider the realities on the ground far more important than some Wikileak asshat's demand for pseudo-transparency.

What a circus. Someone give that guy an Xbox.

[slewis]

I'm somewhat amazed at some of the posts here.

I mean, do we REALLY understand what is taking place in Pakistan?
We are being (the American people) flat out extorted. The gov over there speaks out of both sides of their mouths, and we cant do anything about it.

"If the USA doesn't give the Pakistani Govt 10 billion in aid this year, we wont have the resources to insure that our nuclear arsenal wont "accidently" get into the wrong hands"

And next year, it will be 15 billion..and on and on.

So now Hamid Karzai gets a brainstorm, and threatens us with similar language.

I dont know about you guys on this board, but whether you sit on the left side of the fence or the right, the citizens of this country NEED the transperancy, and a site like Wiki might provide "leverage" to pressure our Pols to move in a more definitive direction.

Right now we are being extorted....

And as far as safety of our military, if this goes on for years and years with no solution (just like our "friends" the Paki's would like $$$$$) more and more lives will be taken.

I want ALL the documents to be released and I want to know EVERYTHING that's going on..... and I will cast my vote in the next election accordingly.

[Tom]

Pakistan has nukes.
I say, give them one or two more.

[hcap]

I say monkeys should not pretend to be armchair generals with firecrackers they don't understand thinking they won't go off in their own clumsy paws

Seem to remember this is your UNIVERSAL answer to ALL the so-called bad guys

Issues you tend to giggle about glibly. While you ignore millions of deaths. The old time religion done right up their kazoos

[Tom]

hcap.............................................. ..........................the point

[hcap]

Pakistan has nukes.
I say, give them one or two more.
So your profound solution is to get back in the "saddle"

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/73/Slim-pickens_riding-the-bomb_enh-lores.jpg/300px-Slim-pickens_riding-the-bomb_enh-lores.jpg

BTW, there are monkeys in Pakistan as well as humans.

[Black Ruby]

So far, what I've read of the documents isn't info that is critical, it's basically our government doing a CYA operation. They don't want us to know just how bad this operation is going, they don't want us to know about civilian deaths. Where's Osama, anyway?

[Robert Goren]

This has turned into "much ado about nothing".

[lsbets]

This has turned into "much ado about nothing".

Someone violating their security clearance is not much ado about nothing. Regardless of what is in the documents, someone gave them to wikileaks. That person needs to be found and prosecuted.

[Mike at A+]

Someone violating their security clearance is not much ado about nothing. Regardless of what is in the documents, someone gave them to wikileaks. That person needs to be found and prosecuted.
Ah, but the argument against prosecuting is that this was old, stale information readily available through several other sources. If any prosecution applies here it must also apply to the New York Times when they did the same thing to the Bush administration. But as we all know, liberals defended the Times using the above argument decrying the right's calls for prosecution as "paranoia" and "selective outrage".

[highnote]

This article sums up the leaks very nicely and also explains the goals of Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Russia, China and U.S.


"This report is republished with permission of STRATFOR"

WikiLeaks and the Afghan War
July 27, 2010 | 0856 GMT
PRINT Text Resize:
ShareThis



By George Friedman

On Sunday, The New York Times and two other newspapers published summaries and excerpts of tens of thousands of documents leaked to a website known as WikiLeaks. The documents comprise a vast array of material concerning the war in Afghanistan. They range from tactical reports from small unit operations to broader strategic analyses of politico-military relations between the United States and Pakistan. It appears to be an extraordinary collection.

Related special topic page
The War in Afghanistan
Tactical intelligence on firefights is intermingled with reports on confrontations between senior U.S. and Pakistani officials in which lists of Pakistani operatives in Afghanistan are handed over to the Pakistanis. Reports on the use of surface-to-air missiles by militants in Afghanistan are intermingled with reports on the activities of former Pakistani intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul, who reportedly continues to liaise with the Afghan Taliban in an informal capacity.

The WikiLeaks
At first glance, it is difficult to imagine a single database in which such a diverse range of intelligence was stored, or the existence of a single individual cleared to see such diverse intelligence stored across multiple databases and able to collect, collate and transmit the intelligence without detection. Intriguingly, all of what has been released so far has been not-so-sensitive material rated secret or below. The Times reports that Gul’s name appears all over the documents, yet very few documents have been released in the current batch, and it is very hard to imagine intelligence on Gul and his organization, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, being classified as only secret. So, this was either low-grade material hyped by the media, or there is material reviewed by the selected newspapers but not yet made public. Still, what was released and what the Times discussed is consistent with what most thought was happening in Afghanistan.

The obvious comparison is to the Pentagon Papers, commissioned by the Defense Department to gather lessons from the Vietnam War and leaked by Daniel Ellsberg to the Times during the Nixon administration. Many people worked on the Pentagon Papers, each of whom was focused on part of it and few of whom would have had access to all of it.

Ellsberg did not give the Times the supporting documentation; he gave it the finished product. By contrast, in the WikiLeaks case, someone managed to access a lot of information that would seem to have been contained in many different places. If this was an unauthorized leak, then it had to have involved a massive failure in security. Certainly, the culprit should be known by now and his arrest should have been announced. And certainly, the gathering of such diverse material in one place accessible to one or even a few people who could move it without detection is odd.

Like the Pentagon Papers, the WikiLeaks (as I will call them) elicited a great deal of feigned surprise, not real surprise. Apart from the charge that the Johnson administration contrived the Gulf of Tonkin incident, much of what the Pentagon Papers contained was generally known. Most striking about the Pentagon Papers was not how much surprising material they contained, but how little. Certainly, they contradicted the official line on the war, but there were few, including supporters of the war, who were buying the official line anyway.

In the case of the WikiLeaks, what is revealed also is not far from what most people believed, although they provide enormous detail. Nor is it that far from what government and military officials are saying about the war. No one is saying the war is going well, though some say that given time it might go better.

The view of the Taliban as a capable fighting force is, of course, widespread. If they weren’t a capable fighting force, then the United States would not be having so much trouble defeating them. The WikiLeaks seem to contain two strategically significant claims, however. The first is that the Taliban is a more sophisticated fighting force than has been generally believed. An example is the claim that Taliban fighters have used man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) against U.S. aircraft. This claim matters in a number of ways. First, it indicates that the Taliban are using technologies similar to those used against the Soviets. Second, it raises the question of where the Taliban are getting them — they certainly don’t manufacture MANPADS themselves.

If they have obtained advanced technologies, this would have significance on the battlefield. For example, if reasonably modern MANPADS were to be deployed in numbers, the use of American airpower would either need to be further constrained or higher attrition rates accepted. Thus far, only first- and second-generation MANPADS without Infrared Counter-Countermeasures (which are more dangerous) appear to have been encountered, and not with decisive or prohibitive effectiveness. But in any event, this doesn’t change the fundamental character of the war.

Supply Lines and Sanctuaries
What it does raise is the question of supply lines and sanctuaries. The most important charge contained in the leaks is about Pakistan. The WikiLeaks contain documents that charge that the Pakistanis are providing both supplies and sanctuary to Taliban fighters while objecting to American forces entering Pakistan to clean out the sanctuaries and are unwilling or unable to carry out that operation by themselves (as they have continued to do in North Waziristan).

Just as important, the documents charge that the ISI has continued to maintain liaison and support for the Taliban in spite of claims by the Pakistani government that pro-Taliban officers had been cleaned out of the ISI years ago. The document charges that Gul, the director-general of the ISI from 1987 to 1989, still operates in Pakistan, informally serving the ISI and helping give the ISI plausible deniability.

Though startling, the charge that Islamabad is protecting and sustaining forces fighting and killing Americans is not a new one. When the United States halted operations in Afghanistan after the defeat of the Soviets in 1989, U.S. policy was to turn over operations in Afghanistan to Pakistan. U.S. strategy was to use Islamist militants to fight the Soviets and to use Pakistani liaisons through the ISI to supply and coordinate with them. When the Soviets and Americans left Afghanistan, the ISI struggled to install a government composed of its allies until the Taliban took over Kabul in 1996. The ISI’s relationship with the Taliban — which in many ways are the heirs to the anti-Soviet mujahideen — is widely known. In my book, “America’s Secret War,” I discussed both this issue and the role of Gul. These documents claim that this relationship remains intact. Apart from Pakistani denials, U.S. officials and military officers frequently made this charge off the record, and on the record occasionally. The leaks on this score are interesting, but they will shock only those who didn’t pay attention or who want to be shocked.

Let’s step back and consider the conflict dispassionately. The United States forced the Taliban from power. It never defeated the Taliban nor did it make a serious effort to do so, as that would require massive resources the United States doesn’t have. Afghanistan is a secondary issue for the United States, especially since al Qaeda has established bases in a number of other countries, particularly Pakistan, making the occupation of Afghanistan irrelevant to fighting al Qaeda.

For Pakistan, however, Afghanistan is an area of fundamental strategic interest. The region’s main ethnic group, the Pashtun, stretch across the Afghan-Pakistani border. Moreover, were a hostile force present in Afghanistan, as one was during the Soviet occupation, Pakistan would face threats in the west as well as the challenge posed by India in the east. For Pakistan, an Afghanistan under Pakistani influence or at least a benign Afghanistan is a matter of overriding strategic importance.

(see map at bottom of this article)

It is therefore irrational to expect the Pakistanis to halt collaboration with the force that they expect to be a major part of the government of Afghanistan when the United States leaves. The Pakistanis never expected the United States to maintain a presence in Afghanistan permanently. They understood that Afghanistan was a means toward an end, and not an end in itself. They understood this under George W. Bush. They understand it even more clearly under Barack Obama, who made withdrawal a policy goal.

Given that they don’t expect the Taliban to be defeated, and given that they are not interested in chaos in Afghanistan, it follows that they will maintain close relations with and support for the Taliban. Given that the United States is powerful and is Pakistan’s only lever against India, the Pakistanis will not make this their public policy, however. The United States has thus created a situation in which the only rational policy for Pakistan is two-tiered, consisting of overt opposition to the Taliban and covert support for the Taliban.

This is duplicitous only if you close your eyes to the Pakistani reality, which the Americans never did. There was ample evidence, as the WikiLeaks show, of covert ISI ties to the Taliban. The Americans knew they couldn’t break those ties. They settled for what support Pakistan could give them while constantly pressing them harder and harder until genuine fears in Washington emerged that Pakistan could destabilize altogether. Since a stable Pakistan is more important to the United States than a victory in Afghanistan — which it wasn’t going to get anyway — the United States released pressure and increased aid. If Pakistan collapsed, then India would be the sole regional power, not something the United States wants.

The WikiLeaks seem to show that like sausage-making, one should never look too closely at how wars are fought, particularly coalition warfare. Even the strongest alliances, such as that between the United States and the United Kingdom in World War II, are fraught with deceit and dissension. London was fighting to save its empire, an end Washington was hostile to; much intrigue ensued. The U.S.-Pakistani alliance is not nearly as trusting. The United States is fighting to deny al Qaeda a base in Afghanistan while Pakistan is fighting to secure its western frontier and its internal stability. These are very different ends that have very different levels of urgency.

The WikiLeaks portray a war in which the United States has a vastly insufficient force on the ground that is fighting a capable and dedicated enemy who isn’t going anywhere. The Taliban know that they win just by not being defeated, and they know that they won’t be defeated. The Americans are leaving, meaning the Taliban need only wait and prepare.

The Pakistanis also know that the Americans are leaving and that the Taliban or a coalition including the Taliban will be in charge of Afghanistan when the Americans leave. They will make certain that they maintain good relations with the Taliban. They will deny that they are doing this because they want no impediments to a good relationship with the United States before or after it leaves Afghanistan. They need a patron to secure their interests against India. Since the United States wants neither an India outside a balance of power nor China taking the role of Pakistan’s patron, it follows that the risk the United States will bear grudges is small. And given that, the Pakistanis can live with Washington knowing that one Pakistani hand is helping the Americans while another helps the Taliban. Power, interest and reality define the relations between nations, and different factions inside nations frequently have different agendas and work against each other.

The WikiLeaks, from what we have seen so far, detail power, interest and reality as we have known it. They do not reveal a new reality. Much will be made about the shocking truth that has been shown, which, as mentioned above, shocks only those who wish to be shocked. The Afghan war is about an insufficient American and allied force fighting a capable enemy on its home ground and a Pakistan positioning itself for the inevitable outcome. The WikiLeaks contain all the details.

We are left with the mystery of who compiled all of these documents and who had access to them with enough time and facilities to transmit them to the outside world in a blatant and sustained breach of protocol. The image we have is of an unidentified individual or small group working to get a “shocking truth” out to the public, only the truth is not shocking — it is what was known all along in excruciating detail. Who would want to detail a truth that is already known, with access to all this documentation and the ability to transmit it unimpeded? Whoever it proves to have been has just made the most powerful case yet for withdrawal from Afghanistan sooner rather than later.



Read more: WikiLeaks and the Afghan War | STRATFOR

[prospector]

its really simple to me..
we're at war...those who leak during war are traitors..
i have no problem lining them and the new york times personnel on the same wall...ready, aim, fire..

[Mike at A+]

its really simple to me..
we're at war...those who leak during war are traitors..
i have no problem lining them and the new york times personnel on the same wall...ready, aim, fire..
Deal

[Tom]

its really simple to me..
we're at war...those who leak during war are traitors..
i have no problem lining them and the new york times personnel on the same wall...ready, aim, fire..

Absolutely!
I'll gladly take on of the rifles.

[JustRalph]

Someone violating their security clearance is not much ado about nothing. Regardless of what is in the documents, someone gave them to wikileaks. That person needs to be found and prosecuted.

They think it's the same guy who gave away stuff to Wiki before. You remember, the video of the choppers who took out the so called "Unarmed" guys?

he is already in jail in Iraq/Kuwait. They are trying to make a bigger case against him now.

They have a legal defense fund website for him

http://www.bradleymanning.org/

more

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/06/bradley-manning-charged-iraq-killings-video

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/7/6/1278438779621/Bradley-Manning-006.jpg

[highnote]

According to the article from Stratfor -- this was a major lapse in security. How did one person have so much access to so many classified documents that are housed in so many different databases in so many different agencies?

At first glance, it is difficult to imagine a single database in which such a diverse range of intelligence was stored, or the existence of a single individual cleared to see such diverse intelligence stored across multiple databases and able to collect, collate and transmit the intelligence without detection.

Maybe it was more than one person? Maybe it was intentional leak?

Who would want to detail a truth that is already known, with access to all this documentation and the ability to transmit it unimpeded? Whoever it proves to have been has just made the most powerful case yet for withdrawal from Afghanistan sooner rather than later.

I agree. This war has wasted time and money and many human lives have been lost.

We're sending billions in aid to Pakistan while at the same time Pakistan is helping the Taliban. And all this is happening in a war in which we know can not be won. The U.S. will leave and what will have been accomplished?

What? Me worry? Is it my imagination -- or is there a resemblance?

[ddog]

They were unarmed , the raggies maybe dumb , but NOBODY is strolling down the street like a sunday walk in the park with a freakin chopper right over their heads if they intend on taking it on. Get a clue goofy!

As to the leaker , seeing as how this gvt has been for many years a criminal enterprise then one can only hope for more leaks or whatever to bring it down.

Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!

If only we could get over this love affair with statist thought that has been ramped to crazy delusional heights since 9/11.

It's killing the country.

By the way, if we hadn't been so hell bent to bloody the ruskies back int he day, maybe they would have kept the area under control. They went in to take down the muslim extremist. Instead we celebrate our victory!

What tools we are. Who won the cold war again?

As Mcrystal said "we have killed a great number of people who posed no threat to us". Ya won't win hearts and minds that way.

It's a farce , get out , way past time.

[BlueShoe]

Yes, why isn't somebody going to jail???
Jail? Why not to the wall? As in front of a firing squad. This was a deliberate act of treason, and the penalty for treason is death. As a few others have commented, the firing squad would be a popular response. Of course, the gallows would work too.

[Tom]

I prefer hanging to a firing squad. And let them stand there on the trap door for a long time.

[Robert Goren]

I saw a report last that they are going over them with a fine tooth comb and they still have not found anything classified Top Secret yet. I am beginning wonder if this isn't just a rouse to get people to his web site.

[Mike at A+]

I don't think they will find anything that is truly "classified". The intention of Wikileaks is to make the US look bad to the rest of the world. If anything "outrageous" is found, Democrats will spin it as Bush's fault. Republicans on the other hand need to stay focused on the economic damage being done by the Obama administration and keep hammering away at his failed policies. This is nothing but one big smokescreen. Voters care more about jobs and their investments.

[Black Ruby]

I don't think they will find anything that is truly "classified". The intention of Wikileaks is to make the US look bad to the rest of the world. If anything "outrageous" is found, Democrats will spin it as Bush's fault. Republicans on the other hand need to stay focused on the economic damage being done by the Obama administration and keep hammering away at his failed policies. This is nothing but one big smokescreen. Voters care more about jobs and their investments.

Since the documents leaked cover the time when Bush was president, that shouldn't take too much spinning. They've got more documents that they're vetting before releasing, hopefully they'll show us what's been going on the last 19 months. Regardless, it makes Obama look bad (as he should) because he's kept the war going when he knew all this stuff. Also looked bad when the admin postured that the info was dangerous to American soldiers, but the press secretary and Gates said it was all "old news".

[dartman51]

I don't know why everyone is getting their panties in a wad over this. It's a wasted emotion. You know that this DOJ will not do anything unless it turns out to be a LILLY WHITE REPUBLICAN. Simple as that. Then they will make it out to be the TEA PARTY and GWB, that conspired to do it all.

[bigmack]

I want ALL the documents to be released and I want to know EVERYTHING that's going on.....and I will cast my vote in the next election accordingly.
For posturing as bright guy you sure are confused on a host of subjects.

Would you like the names of informants for various PD's around the country as well? Would that help you make an informed decision come election time?

Julian Assange’s leak included the names of hundreds of informants and people working with US forces in Afghanistan. Those people will now have to be protected, and it’s not likely they’ll be replaced...

The US will probably have to move all of the people named in the documents and their families, which means they won’t be able to continue in their current efforts. After this exposure, we’ll have a lot of trouble finding anyone else who wants to work with us on the ground in Afghanistan, which makes our efforts there a hell of a lot more complicated, and will probably result in more dead Americans as well as Afghans.

[Tom]

Obama has already stated that he does not want victory in Afghanistan.

Is anything else really relevant?

[BlueShoe]

I don't think they will find anything that is truly "classified".
Many of the documents were classified as secret. At that level the information can be of great value to the enemy and cause great harm to the US.

[JustRalph]

Many of the documents were classified as secret. At that level the information can be of great value to the enemy and cause great harm to the US.

exactly!

[Mike at A+]

Many of the documents were classified as secret. At that level the information can be of great value to the enemy and cause great harm to the US.
Could have sworn I heard Gibbs say that this was all old stuff. But I certainly agree that if any (still) classified data was released we should prosecute to the fullest extent of the law.

[PaceAdvantage]

All that outrage over the Valerie Plame thingy...where are all those fellas now? Where's the outrage over lives put at risk now? Actual lives. Not the bullshit about Valerie Plame...

[slewis]

For posturing as bright guy you sure are confused on a host of subjects.

Would you like the names of informants for various PD's around the country as well? Would that help you make an informed decision come election time?

Oh, hundreds and hundreds of Afghans helping us...yeah right, and things are going oh so well...

You're a fool like many other Americans who buy into this crap.
We are doing nothing but BUYING (as in $$$$) buying "help, friendship, etc"...all at the expense of US taxpayers, in aid.


If you choose to have covert operations in a country like Afghanistan, that's one thing...but as soon as you decide to bring in OUR MILITARY, the rules change.
That's one thing you, and others on this panel that say we are "at war", and I, disagree with.

Our soldiers should NEVER again..NEVER, be placed, in harms way, without using the virtual FULL FORCE of US Military power.
If we are at war, then destroy the enemy at all costs, civillian or otherwise. If it's not politically possible or correct to do that, or if the fallout around the globe from other (Muslim) countries is too great, then get the hell out NOW.
This game our leaders are playing of Military Chess with an enemy/friends, which often sits on both sides of the fence is WRONG, and history has repeatedly shown that the "friends" you aid today (in these regions) will be the same enemy you fight tomorrow.
And dont think Bigmack-shite that our "enemy" doesn't know that they are financially destroying this country by keeping the game going at a cost of Billions per year and that it isn't part of their gameplan.

Lastly, I feel not the least bit insecure when a clown like you describes me as "confused" on a host of subjects.

Hang on, maybe I'll misspell a word or two so you'll have something of intellect to come back at me on.

[slewis]

All that outrage over the Valerie Plame thingy...where are all those fellas now? Where's the outrage over lives put at risk now? Actual lives. Not the bullshit about Valerie Plame...

Not the same scenario Mike.

[bigmack]

Lastly, I feel not the least bit insecure when a clown like you describes me as "confused" on a host of subjects.

Hang on, maybe I'll misspell a word or two so you'll have something of intellect to come back at me on.
See if you can wrap that TwinkieBrain around this. My issue with you was this statement of yours:
I want ALL the documents to be released and I want to know EVERYTHING that's going on.....and I will cast my vote in the next election accordingly.
NOT, how things are going and/or whether we should pull the plug. You see, the subject of the thread is the leakage of classified docs. What a surprise huh? :eek:

You say bring "Bring 'em on & then some" & I say "You're nuts"

How's that for ya?

[delayjf]

Your right,this is much worse.

[slewis]

See if you can wrap that TwinkieBrain around this. My issue with you was this statement of yours:

NOT, how things are going and/or whether we should pull the plug. You see, the subject of the thread is the leakage of classified docs. What a surprise huh? :eek:

You say bring "Bring 'em on & then some" & I say "You're nuts"

How's that for ya?


Maybe you should re-read..carefully...what I posted...Twinkieboy...


"If you choose to have covert operations in a country like Afghanistan, that's one thing...but as soon as you decide to bring in OUR MILITARY, the rules change."


Do I need to S-L-O-W-L-Y explain...or do you get what I said?

I repeat, once you bring the Military in, the rules change (when you fail to use the FULL MILITARY POWER to win).
If you back this hide-go-seek game our recent Presidents choose/chose, to play with young American lives...let's put members of YOUR family is situations with targets on their backs.

[bigmack]

I repeat, once you bring the Military in, the rules change (when you fail to use the FULL MILITARY POWER to win).
If you back this hide-go-seek game our recent Presidents choose/chose, to play with young American lives...let's put members of YOUR family is situations with targets on their backs.
Just so we're clear & I know I'm not dealing with someone who's halfway through a bottle of scotch, we're on the same page on the rules of engagement. You're being rather dense when it comes to the issue at hand.

You see, when The Doughboys rolled around Europe in WWI, they worked with informants. Before & after the troops hit Normandy, they worked with informants. In Viet Nam, we worked with informants. In Iraq, we worked with informants. Get the picture?

The issue of the thread is leaked documents. You proclaim that you want everything to come out. We're still embroiled in the battle! Can't you get that through your skull?

If we were having this discussion in '43 and some Ninny leaked classified docs naming people that gave us beneficial information, you're saying you would be for that?

I suspect you're moving in a direction that ain't the subject at hand.

Focus, or start another thread. Capiche?

[slewis]

Normandy & WWII....... vs Afghanistan & Taliban...:lol:


Who's had a few too many?

Let's put this to bed..... If a few "informants" get beheaded (which according to everything I've read, won't happen)..oh well, they'll be our martyrs...

I want our boys home unless we can completely change the dynamics of the region....and that ain't happening......and we're being played by Kharzai and the Paki's...to the tune of 20 billion per year.

Take it from an ex wall streeter....this is a bad investment...cut the losses now.

[bigmack]

Normandy & WWII....... vs Afghanistan & Taliban...:lol:

Vs? How obtuse can you get?

My point was they're akin.

You're incorrigibly confused.

Let me know when when you have interest in addressing the subject at hand. You know, the release of classified documents that you want more of and will base your voting decision upon. :D

I wonder, how has the actual topic at hand still escaped you?

Wall Street experience you say? Golly. Tell us all about it. Again & again...

[JustRalph]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/08/12/wikileaks-spokesman-preparing-release-remaining-afghan-intelligence-files/?test=latestnews

This is going to get much worse apparently

[PaceAdvantage]

The guy looks like Bill Maher's brother...but even Bill Maher has more sense in his pinkie finger than this guy apparently...where's the black helicopters when you need them?

[JustRalph]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/panetta-says-cia-will-probe-wikileaks-document-release-106918188.html


With few words, I think this memo says very very much.

If I was Julie Boy I might be seeking a new hideout

[cj's dad]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/panetta-says-cia-will-probe-wikileaks-document-release-106918188.html


With few words, I think this memo says very very much.

If I was Julie Boy I might be seeking a new hideout

I wonder if this new directive originated in the White House ?

[JustRalph]

I wonder if this new directive originated in the White House ?

Historically the CIA (the last 15 yrs or so) has been considered an enemy to the White House. Especially to the Bush White House. Clinton had his problems with them too. But the CIA took a serious battering when it came to 9-11 and Iraq. The entire Intelligence apparatus hunkered down and became a true handicap to Bush.

Panetta was the big dog installed to bring this group back around to Obama's flank. Panetta in so many words said this in a couple of speeches. He was very open about re-establishing the agency as an organization of change for the better that was going to fit in well with the whole hope and change narrative. He made some great speeches. Team building kind of things were said. Now days he is on the defensive I believe. Just like most of the Administration he doesn't need any distractions. Things are bad enough. This Wiki-Leaks thing is very much a problem for him.

Some employees have turned on the Wiki-Leaks founder lately too. They are talking to investigators. This will probably be Julian's undoing. Some of them are going to know where the bodies are buried. I also anticipate more military personnel being locked up. That little sex assault case is not going completely away either. Julian may find himself running from the law for that too.

The employees that turned on him are upset that he went "playboy" after becoming famous. He apparently was cashing in on his celebrity in the clubs and hotel rooms in Sweden. I think he eventually ends up on a prison with his informants in the cell down the hall.

[JustRalph]

This just keeps getting worse and worse

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/11/us-prepares-for-new-wikileaks-release.html

classified cables from Diplomats should be interesting......and damaging

[Tom]

What an embarrassment Obama is to this nation. He is nothing more than a substitute teacher.

What is next - changing the CIA mission to muslim outreach?

[PaceAdvantage]

I wonder why no mysterious "outage" or minor technological catastrophe has yet to hit the building(s) which house the servers for "Wikileaks?"

Surely our more covert organizations have the capability to pinpoint and disable this organizations technological resources, even if they reside in a foreign land?

[highnote]

I wonder why no mysterious "outage" or minor technological catastrophe has yet to hit the building(s) which house the servers for "Wikileaks?"

Surely our more covert organizations have the capability to pinpoint and disable this organizations technological resources, even if they reside in a foreign land?


Good point. One take on it could be that by letting the site operate our agents can find out more about the people running it and where they are getting their info.

[ArlJim78]

Does anyone think these leaks aren't intentional.

[highnote]

Does anyone think these leaks aren't intentional.


Love your signature line! LOL

[Saratoga_Mike]

I wonder why no mysterious "outage" or minor technological catastrophe has yet to hit the building(s) which house the servers for "Wikileaks?"

Surely our more covert organizations have the capability to pinpoint and disable this organizations technological resources, even if they reside in a foreign land?

This is a great question. More broadly, why are terrorist recruiting websites allowed to operate? Don't we have the technological know-how to crash these sites? Sorry if this is off-topic, but I've always wondered about this. Could someone who knows technology address this issue???

[Tom]

Obama won't take out those websites - professional courtesy.

[Tom]

I wonder why no mysterious "outage" or minor technological catastrophe has yet to hit the building(s) which house the servers for "Wikileaks?"



Good point - our own people took out the towers and the pentagon....why this should be a piece of cake to do.

[JustRalph]

I wonder why no mysterious "outage" or minor technological catastrophe has yet to hit the building(s) which house the servers for "Wikileaks?"

Surely our more covert organizations have the capability to pinpoint and disable this organizations technological resources, even if they reside in a foreign land?

I suggest that maybe we are learning more from them, than they are from us?

I also might suggest that Wiki leaks might have more on the table to come. Obama may not want them to release more.......If we really wanted to, we could take down their servers. I would lean on whatever country has the servers hosted.

Remember, and never forget. We can put a cruise missile through any window in the world. Whenever we want. Reagan understood this very well. The rest of these wingnuts............not so much

[PaceAdvantage]

If we really wanted to, we could take down their servers. I would lean on whatever country has the servers hosted. It probably wouldn't accomplish much anyway...I'm sure they have spread these unreleased documents amongst many different people in many different locations...but still, at least a statement would be made by yielding some covert muscle.

[sammy the sage]

by ''ALLOWING" fear monger's to operate...saves the Gov...aka...Big Brother...propaganda money...and further's the LARGER agenda of TAKING AWAY your individual freedoms...one step at a time...and BOTH sides are EQUALLY as guilty of such!

[JustRalph]

Looks like Wiki Leaks is worried about their servers etc, staying up

http://erictric.com/2010/11/25/wikileaks-urges-public-to-download-insurance-file/

[PaceAdvantage]

What has been the Obama administration's reaction to this ongoing saga?

I am thinking some past administrations would have been a little more proactive in the face of such an historic breach.

[Tom]

Apparently, Hillary is working OT contacting everyone who is going to be very pissed off at us.

So much for the new world respect Obama was going to bring home. :D

[Steve R]

Bravo, Mr. Assange! Maybe some of you should take note of your own Constitution. Currently "imminent lawless action" is the test applied in free speech cases. It was introduced by the U.S. Supreme Court in Brandenburg vs Ohio (1969) overturning the "clear and present danger" criterion established in Schenck v. United States (1919). In Hess vs Indiana (1973) the Court held that advocacy of illegal action at some indefinite future time does not amount to imminence and is protected. There is no indication that Mr. Assange intends to incite "immediate lawless action" by the release of these documents and his right to release them is protected in the United States. If the government can determine just cause to apprehend and prosecute those who first obtained the documents, then fine, let them try. But that has nothing to do with Mr. Assange's right to make the documents public.

Of course in the U.S., according to George Bush the Constitution is just a scrap of paper, and it is simply ignored by the government when inconvenient to its malicious purpose. But you already knew that re habeus corpus, illegal detention, torture and search and seizure violations. Besides, most Americans don't give a crap about Constitutional law, democracy or human rights - only where their next electronic toy is coming from or who will be the next American Idol.

[ArlJim78]

hats off to CNN for not playing ball with this attention whore.

CNN has not had advance access to the documents, unlike some media organizations, because the company declined to sign a confidentiality agreement with WikiLeaks

how pathetic that he wants a confidentiality agreement before giving access to the illegally obtained information. a model free speech advocate this guy.

[highnote]

What was in the confidentiality agreement?


hats off to CNN for not playing ball with this attention whore.



how pathetic that he wants a confidentiality agreement before giving access to the illegally obtained information. a model free speech advocate this guy.

[ArlJim78]

they didn't elaborate, but what I surmise is that in exchange for Assange releasing the material to them, the news organizations had to agree not to divulge anything ahead of time, so as not to upstage his little show.

[Tom]

The guy's head is in dire need of a bullet.
CIA should take this traitor out. Then left CNN have the video of it.
I would love to watch his brains splatter against a wall.

"You have the right to bleed.
If you choose not to bleed, a wound will be provided to you, free of charge."

You kill traitors, End of story.

[highnote]

Hypothetically, can someone who is not a citizen of a country be a traitor to another country?

What if a U.S. citizen leaked documents about Iranian defense secrets? Would the U.S. citizen be a traitor to Iran?





The guy's head is in dire need of a bullet.
CIA should take this traitor out. Then left CNN have the video of it.
I would love to watch his brains splatter against a wall.

"You have the right to bleed.
If you choose not to bleed, a wound will be provided to you, free of charge."

You kill traitors, End of story.

[ArlJim78]

the traitors are in our own government. there are people delighted with what is being written now in Der Spiegel (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731580,00.html). this is truly a "mission accomplished" moment for Obama.

A Political Meltdown

Such surprises from the annals of US diplomacy will dominate the headlines in the coming days when the New York Times, London’s Guardian, Paris’ Le Monde, Madrid’s El Pais and SPIEGEL begin shedding light on the treasure trove of secret documents from the State Department. Included are 243,270 diplomatic cables filed by US embassies to the State Department and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent to its diplomatic outposts around the world. In the coming days, the participating media will show in a series of investigative stories how America seeks to steer the world. The development is no less than a political meltdown for American foreign policy.

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information — data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America’s partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public — as have America’s true views of them…

[highnote]

It's hard for me to believe the CIA or FBI or military can't find the person responsible for these leaks. How many people in our government have access to this information? Obviously, at least one too many!

I get the feeling there is much more behind these leaks than we are being told.


the traitors are in our own government. there are people delighted with what is being written now in Der Spiegel (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731580,00.html). this is truly a "mission accomplished" moment for Obama.

[Tom]

I get the feeling there is much more behind these leaks than we are being told.

Yes, he got them from a traitor. Therefore, he is a traitor, too.
I am pretty liberal when it comes to shooting scumbags.

[highnote]

Yes, he got them from a traitor. Therefore, he is a traitor, too.
I am pretty liberal when it comes to shooting scumbags.


How can it be so difficult to find out who stole these documents? How many people could there be that have this level of access?

[JustRalph]

How can it be so difficult to find out who stole these documents? How many people could there be that have this level of access?

We have the guy who leaked them already locked up. He will be going to trial in the military. The worse it gets the more likely he is going to be executed.

Of course assange could give shit, he is now a celeb

[highnote]

We have the guy who leaked them already locked up. He will be going to trial in the military. The worse it gets the more likely he is going to be executed.

Of course assange could give shit, he is now a celeb


I knew they had a guy in custody because he looks like the guy on the cover of Mad Magazine. However, I didn't know he was the one who leaded all the documents. The fact that all the docs were not released at the same is what confused me. I thought someone else was leaking also.

[PaceAdvantage]

Bravo, Mr. Assange! Maybe some of you should take note of your own Constitution. Currently "imminent lawless action" is the test applied in free speech cases. It was introduced by the U.S. Supreme Court in Brandenburg vs Ohio (1969) overturning the "clear and present danger" criterion established in Schenck v. United States (1919). In Hess vs Indiana (1973) the Court held that advocacy of illegal action at some indefinite future time does not amount to imminence and is protected. There is no indication that Mr. Assange intends to incite "immediate lawless action" by the release of these documents and his right to release them is protected in the United States. If the government can determine just cause to apprehend and prosecute those who first obtained the documents, then fine, let them try. But that has nothing to do with Mr. Assange's right to make the documents public.

Of course in the U.S., according to George Bush the Constitution is just a scrap of paper, and it is simply ignored by the government when inconvenient to its malicious purpose. But you already knew that re habeus corpus, illegal detention, torture and search and seizure violations. Besides, most Americans don't give a crap about Constitutional law, democracy or human rights - only where their next electronic toy is coming from or who will be the next American Idol.Mr. Assange is not a US citizen thus cannot take advantage of any of the protections afforded by the US Constitution.

But thanks for your rant nonetheless.... :lol:

[Steve R]

Mr. Assange is not a US citizen thus cannot take advantage of any of the protections afforded by the US Constitution.

But thanks for your rant nonetheless.... :lol:
Sorry, but not surprisingly, you are wrong. According to the web site U.S. Constitution Online (http://www.usconstitution.net) the Constitution does protect the freedom of speech of every citizen, and even of non-citizens from restriction by the Congress (and, by virtue of the 14th Amendment, by state legislatures).

Of course, a lack of understanding of their rights in the U.S. Constitution is a fundamental characteristic of American citizens which is why they continually (and sheepishly) allow the elimination or arbitrary suspension of those rights. A very sad state of affairs indeed for a nation that professes to believe in the principles of democratic government but almost never behaves accordingly.

[highnote]

Mr. Assange is not a US citizen thus cannot take advantage of any of the protections afforded by the US Constitution.

But thanks for your rant nonetheless.... :lol:


I'm not a lawyer, but that's an interesting point.

If Steve R is correct that assange's actions are protected by the U.S. Constitution then did he break any laws?

If he was arrested where would he be tried?

If his actions are protected by the Constitution then what would the charges be?

If these docs were released outside of the U.S. what jurisdiction is he subject to?

[PaceAdvantage]

Sorry, but not surprisingly, you are wrong. According to the web site U.S. Constitution Online (http://www.usconstitution.net) the Constitution does protect the freedom of speech of every citizen, and even of non-citizens from restriction by the Congress (and, by virtue of the 14th Amendment, by state legislatures).

Of course, a lack of understanding of their rights in the U.S. Constitution is a fundamental characteristic of American citizens which is why they continually (and sheepishly) allow the elimination or arbitrary suspension of those rights. A very sad state of affairs indeed for a nation that professes to believe in the principles of democratic government but almost never behaves accordingly.Assange is NOT located in the United States thus he can NOT take advantage of any of the protections afforded him by the US Constitution.

Surely you knew Assange was not physically located within the US.

The US Constitution does NOT protect Assange from the full wrath of the US Gov't and US Military as it applies to stopping the release of these classified documents overseas, where Assange and his servers are located.

[Tom]

Just find him and blow his brains out. Case closed.

[Steve R]

Assange is NOT located in the United States thus he can NOT take advantage of any of the protections afforded him by the US Constitution.

Surely you knew Assange was not physically located within the US.

The US Constitution does NOT protect Assange from the full wrath of the US Gov't and US Military as it applies to stopping the release of these classified documents overseas, where Assange and his servers are located.
Nonsense, and I don't care where he is. The issue was whether he can be prosecuted for releasing the documents. Well, not in the U.S. unless the courts simply spit on the Constitution, which I fully expect they might. They do quite often. As for "the full wrath" of the U.S. government and the U.S. military, extralegal assassination is par for the course, something well understood by the rest of the world and one of a multitude of reasons the U.S. is widely despised.

As a resident of Latin America, I am fully aware of the sordid history of American murder and corruption in this part of the world in support of the United Fruit Company and its iterative descendants. Here, we understand very well the "full wrath" of the U.S. military, and although you have had the support of some Latin American fascist leaders over the years, I can assure you that the vast majority of the people in Central and South have no love for the United States. "Yanqui go home" is alive and well.

[bigmack]

As a resident of Latin America, I am fully aware of the sordid history of American murder and corruption in this part of the world in support of the United Fruit Company and its iterative descendants. Here, we understand very well the "full wrath" of the U.S. military, and although you have had the support of some Latin American fascist leaders over the years, I can assure you that the vast majority of the people in Central and South have no love for the United States. "Yanqui go home" is alive and well.
:lol: And you talk about Americans being sheepish and undereducated. Got a mirror?

[PaceAdvantage]

Nonsense, and I don't care where he is. The issue was whether he can be prosecuted for releasing the documents. Well, not in the U.S. unless the courts simply spit on the Constitution, which I fully expect they might. They do quite often. As for "the full wrath" of the U.S. government and the U.S. military, extralegal assassination is par for the course, something well understood by the rest of the world and one of a multitude of reasons the U.S. is widely despised.

As a resident of Latin America, I am fully aware of the sordid history of American murder and corruption in this part of the world in support of the United Fruit Company and its iterative descendants. Here, we understand very well the "full wrath" of the U.S. military, and although you have had the support of some Latin American fascist leaders over the years, I can assure you that the vast majority of the people in Central and South have no love for the United States. "Yanqui go home" is alive and well.It's funny, up in the horse racing part of this board, you NEVER engage me...but down here, it seems you can't get enough... :lol:

[JustRalph]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/how-us-embassy-cables-leaked

From the Link Above:

The US military believes it knows where the leak originated. A soldier, Bradley Manning, 22, has been held in solitary confinement for the last seven months and is facing a court martial in the new year. The former intelligence analyst is charged with unauthorised downloads of classified material while serving on an army base outside Baghdad. He is suspected of taking copies not only of the state department archive, but also of video of an Apache helicopter crew gunning down civilians in Baghdad, and hundreds of thousands of daily war logs from military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It was childishly easy, according to the published chatlog of a conversation Manning had with a fellow-hacker. "I would come in with music on a CD-RW labelled with something like 'Lady Gaga' … erase the music … then write a compressed split file. No one suspected a thing ... [I] listened and lip-synched to Lady Gaga's Telephone while exfiltrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history." He said that he "had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day 7 days a week for 8+ months".

Manning told his correspondent Adrian Lamo, who subsequently denounced him to the authorities: "Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public ... Everywhere there's a US post, there's a diplomatic scandal that will be revealed. Worldwide anarchy in CSV format ... It's beautiful, and horrifying."

He added: "Information should be free. It belongs in the public domain."

Manning, according to the chatlogs, says he uploaded the copies to WikiLeaks, the "freedom of information activists" as he called them, led by Australian former hacker Julian Assange.

[JustRalph]

An example of how this endangers peoples lives

From the cable stuff at Wiki Leaks:

http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/03/09BAKU179.html

classified By: POLECON COUNSELOR ROB GARVERICK,
REASON 1.5 (B and D)

¶1. (S) A well-connected Iranian businessman who owns a
Baku-based oil services company told Baku Iran watcher that a
company called "INSULTEC," owned by UK citizens of Indian
origin, has secretly provided cladding, thermal insulation,
and ancillary equipment to the government of Iran in a
variety of shipments via Turkey and the U.A.E. According to
the Baku source, whose company operates in Russia,
Kazakhstan, and the U.A.E. as well as Azerbaijan, the
materials allegedly sent by INSULTEC in falsely labeled
containers were of type that could be used in nuclear reactor
construction. Citing old Iran and Dubai based business
friends allegedly familiar with the issue, the source said
that INSULTEC has maintained a sanctions-evading relationship
with Iranian government companies for some time. Source said
that the company was officially headquartered in the U.K.,
and has offices in Germany, the USA, and elsewhere, its
manufacturing base and the bulk of its staff are in India.

¶2. (S) Perhaps more disturbingly, the source (who had just
returned from ten days in Dubai) said that he had been
informed by an Iranian friend who had collaborated in the
activity that INSULTEC recently helped facilitate a shipment
from the UAE to Iran consisting of twelve containers
(possibly labeled "insulation") of unknown material that may
not have actually originated with INSULTEC. The source sai
he was told by his friend that the shipment went by ship to
Bandar Abbas and was trucked immediately to a final
destination in Busheir. The friend told source that another
Iranian destination was falsely listed in the shipping
documents, presumably to hide the actually intended
destination of Busheir.

¶3. (S) The Baku businessman is a UK-educated engineer from a
prominent Pre-Revolution Isfahan family, and formerly owned a
large factory in Iran. He is a former national fencing
champion of Iran. former President of the Iran Fencing
Association, and Vice-President of an Azerbaijan sports
association. He has been based in Baku for more than ten
years, working primarily as a sub-contractor to BP and the
Cape Industrial Services company. While his oil services
company includes an insulation division that may be in
competition with INSULTEC, source has provided "inside"
information on many other Iranian issues (including
comprehensive data on the status of new Iranian oil refinery
construction) that does not relate to his private interests
in any way.

How hard do you think it will be to figure out who this guy is ?

[Steve R]

:lol: And you talk about Americans being sheepish and undereducated. Got a mirror?
Have you always been ignorant or is it a recent development? Either way it appears your knowledge of the history of U.S. intervention in Latin America is non-existent which, again, is a very American thing. Read a book.

[Steve R]

It's funny, up in the horse racing part of this board, you NEVER engage me...but down here, it seems you can't get enough... :lol:
Could it be because you know what you're talking about up there?

[ArlJim78]

these two pixies are the culprits in this sad affair.

Assange
http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/ja1.jpg


PFC Bradley

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/manning.jpg

[johnhannibalsmith]

Could it be because you know what you're talking about up there?

And you bring an objective perspective?

[PaceAdvantage]

Could it be because you know what you're talking about up there?How is it wrong to claim a non-citizen of the USA residing in a country other than the USA has no claim to any rights afforded by the US Constitution?

My mistake was in assuming people knew Assange does not reside in America.

[Steve R]

And you bring an objective perspective?
I don't know, although I think my case concerning U.S. activities in Latin America has been strengthened by one of the Wikileaks cables, this one from U.S. ambassador to Honduras, Hugo Lorens, a former Cuban-exile with no great love for leftist governments. Mr. Lorens concludes in his cable that "no matter what the merits of the case against Zelaya, his forced removal by the military was clearly illegal, and Micheletti's ascendance as 'interim president' was totally illegitimate" and that "the actions of June 28 can only be considered a coup d'etat by the legislative branch, with the support of the judicial branch and the military, against the executive branch". The memo went to two White House legal advisors, one of whom was named to the International Court of Justice (and who now should be obliged to step down). Also, contrary to U.S. law, the Millennium Foundation (chaired by Hillary Clinton) continued to deliver aid to the outlaw regime. The analysis went to the White House, meaning that Obama subsequently participated in what he knew to be an illegal dictatorship. So on second thought my perspective is certainly more objective than yours.

[boxcar]

Have you always been ignorant or is it a recent development? Either way it appears your knowledge of the history of U.S. intervention in Latin America is non-existent which, again, is a very American thing. Read a book.

Well golly gee whiz, Stevie, it appears that you're not a very grateful human being for all that the U.S. has done for Latin America. Sounds like it might be high time for the U.S. to cut off all of LA's welfare checks. Then everyone would have to resort to reading tea leaves because books would be beyond their financial grasp.

Boxcar

[highnote]

This reminds me of something I learned in high school. Never put anything in writing that you don't want others to see.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/how-us-embassy-cables-leaked

From the Link Above:

The US military believes it knows where the leak originated. A soldier, Bradley Manning, 22, has been held in solitary confinement for the last seven months and is facing a court martial in the new year. The former intelligence analyst is charged with unauthorised downloads of classified material while serving on an army base outside Baghdad. He is suspected of taking copies not only of the state department archive, but also of video of an Apache helicopter crew gunning down civilians in Baghdad, and hundreds of thousands of daily war logs from military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It was childishly easy, according to the published chatlog of a conversation Manning had with a fellow-hacker. "I would come in with music on a CD-RW labelled with something like 'Lady Gaga' … erase the music … then write a compressed split file. No one suspected a thing ... [I] listened and lip-synched to Lady Gaga's Telephone while exfiltrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history." He said that he "had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day 7 days a week for 8+ months".

Manning told his correspondent Adrian Lamo, who subsequently denounced him to the authorities: "Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public ... Everywhere there's a US post, there's a diplomatic scandal that will be revealed. Worldwide anarchy in CSV format ... It's beautiful, and horrifying."

He added: "Information should be free. It belongs in the public domain."

Manning, according to the chatlogs, says he uploaded the copies to WikiLeaks, the "freedom of information activists" as he called them, led by Australian former hacker Julian Assange.

[Steve R]

Well golly gee whiz, Stevie, it appears that you're not a very grateful human being for all that the U.S. has done for Latin America. Sounds like it might be high time for the U.S. to cut off all of LA's welfare checks. Then everyone would have to resort to reading tea leaves because books would be beyond their financial grasp.

Boxcar
By "all that the U.S. has done for Latin America" are you referring to the CIA-planned and assisted overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala on behalf of the United Fruit Company, an event that led to 40 years of U.S.-backed Guatemalan dictatorships and the murder of over 100,000 civilians? Or do you mean the Nixon-administration backed overthrow of democratically-elected Salvador Allende in Chile in support of ITT interests and the installation of the fascist dictator Augusto Pinochet who murdered thousands of opponents and instituted a program of assassination reaching around the world, all with U.S. support? Maybe you are talking about the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti by paramilitaries on the CIA payroll, leading to 8,000 murders and 35,000 rapes by government death squads over the next two years. Then again you could also be thinking of the U.S.-supported assassination of Augusto César Sandino by Anastasio Somoza and his U.S.-created National Guard leading to decades of brutal dictatorship and tens of thousands of political murders. There are dozens more examples of U.S. aid to Latin America. But like everything else, the U.S. is only about money, so any financial assistance afforded Latin America always comes with a devastating price tag.

BTW, the U.S. and Costa Rica have usually had cordial relations (except, perhaps, when the CIA twice attempted to assassinate one of its presidents) but that may be changing. The Costa Rican government in recent years has turned to China for assistance and they have responded with major construction projects (a national stadium and new roads) and numerous gifts (an entire fleet of cars for the national police force). I'm not at all a fan of China and I don't really see the upside. But the transition does suggest that whatever you believe constitutes U.S. aid apparently has too many strings.

[boxcar]

By "all that the U.S. has done for Latin America" are you referring to the CIA-planned and assisted overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala on behalf of the United Fruit Company, an event that led to 40 years of U.S.-backed Guatemalan dictatorships and the murder of over 100,000 civilians? Or do you mean the Nixon-administration backed overthrow of democratically-elected Salvador Allende in Chile in support of ITT interests and the installation of the fascist dictator Augusto Pinochet who murdered thousands of opponents and instituted a program of assassination reaching around the world, all with U.S. support? Maybe you are talking about the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti by paramilitaries on the CIA payroll, leading to 8,000 murders and 35,000 rapes by government death squads over the next two years. Then again you could also be thinking of the U.S.-supported assassination of Augusto César Sandino by Anastasio Somoza and his U.S.-created National Guard leading to decades of brutal dictatorship and tens of thousands of political murders. There are dozens more examples of U.S. aid to Latin America. But like everything else, the U.S. is only about money, so any financial assistance afforded Latin America always comes with a devastating price tag.

BTW, the U.S. and Costa Rica have usually had cordial relations (except, perhaps, when the CIA twice attempted to assassinate one of its presidents) but that may be changing. The Costa Rican government in recent years has turned to China for assistance and they have responded with major construction projects (a national stadium and new roads) and numerous gifts (an entire fleet of cars for the national police force). I'm not at all a fan of China and I don't really see the upside. But the transition does suggest that whatever you believe constitutes U.S. aid apparently has too many strings.


Stevie...psst...I have a little secret for you. The U.S. ain't perfect. This is music to your ears, I'm sure. But the bad news is: Neither is any other country. On balance, the U.S. still does far more good for the world than harm.

As for those "attached strings"...I have another secret for you: There ain't no free lunches in the earth. It's an urban legend; for even animals have to work for their food! Live it. Love it. Learn it.

And,yes, it's all about money. Seems like the U.S. actually does have something in common with the U.N., doesn't it? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

When will this wikileach guy get us something really secretive. like say Obama's college transcripts, or the names and countries of origin of the credit card donors to Obama's 2008 campaign?

[Steve R]

Stevie...psst...I have a little secret for you. The U.S. ain't perfect. This is music to your ears, I'm sure. But the bad news is: Neither is any other country. On balance, the U.S. still does far more good for the world than harm.

As for those "attached strings"...I have another secret for you: There ain't no free lunches in the earth. It's an urban legend; for even animals have to work for their food! Live it. Love it. Learn it.

And,yes, it's all about money. Seems like the U.S. actually does have something in common with the U.N., doesn't it? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
I understand. U.S. support of dictatorships and its direct involvement in the assassination/murder/torture of tens of thousands of civilians in support of American economic interests is your definition of "ain't perfect." What definitely "ain't perfect" is what lives in your heart and conscience.

[ArlJim78]

SteveR, you are singing from the same songbook as some other enlightened thinkers we have here, namely Joy Behar, Rosie O'Donnell, Whoopie Goldberg and Micheal Moore.

[boxcar]

I understand. U.S. support of dictatorships and its direct involvement in the assassination/murder/torture of tens of thousands of civilians in support of American economic interests is your definition of "ain't perfect." What definitely "ain't perfect" is what lives in your heart and conscience.

With all your ingratitude for all the good we have done for your "brothers" when they come to the U.S. with their cupped hands held out, you might want to be more careful before tossing stones at the House of the U.S. since you, too, live in a glass one. However, my house is bullet-proof because we can afford that up here.

Also, never forget this: Virtually all LA is still third worldish compared to the U.S. If we ever pulled the plug on our generosity, it probably would flush you and your brethren back down to the stone age. So, make nice. Not war...especially one you're not equipped to win! ;)

Boxcar

[boxcar]

SteveR, you are singing from the same songbook as some other enlightened thinkers we have here, namely Joy Behar, Rosie O'Donnell, Whoopie Goldberg and Micheal Moore.

Yes, all the like-minded hollow heads the emit the same empty barrel sound.

Boxcar

[Steve R]

Yes, all the like-minded hollow heads the emit the same empty barrel sound.

Boxcar
Whatever! Although I must say it is a hoot watching Americans squirm and piss and moan over the leaked documents. Your "snit" is hysterical. As I said earlier: Bravo Mr. Assange - Thank you.

[johnhannibalsmith]

So on second thought my perspective is certainly more objective than yours.

I must have missed both thoughts, because I'm not sure how you can form a conclusion on my perspective. Maybe you study my posts in detail. On the other hand, "Yanqui Go Home" seems to be a fairly appropriate encapsulation of most of your posts here. How about a third thought.

I enjoy reading your posts, but I find at laughable that you post these ranting diatribes (which are good reading) and then want to be acknowledged as the level-headed voice of objective reasoning amongst wezuzzall Amerikanskis. Your perspective is fine, the self-righteous crap not so much.

[ArlJim78]

heh, according to some of the pixieleaks (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40406552/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/), Arab leaders were pleading, begging for us to do something about Irans nukes. Funny, that our media only talks about how Israel is the scrourge of the mideast, how the big impediment to peace in the region is settlements in Jerusalem. However if you read these cables, its sure sounds like there is a different viewpoint shared by Iran's neighbors.


His plea was shared by many of America’s Arab allies, including the powerful King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who according to another cable repeatedly implored Washington to “cut off the head of the snake” while there was still time.
...
At the same time, the cables reveal how Iran’s ascent has unified Israel and many longtime Arab adversaries — notably the Saudis — in a common cause. Publicly, these Arab states held their tongues, for fear of a domestic uproar and the retributions of a powerful neighbor. Privately, they clamored for strong action — by someone else.

[boxcar]

Whatever! Although I must say it is a hoot watching Americans squirm and piss and moan over the leaked documents. Your "snit" is hysterical. As I said earlier: Bravo Mr. Assange - Thank you.

Yes...and if the U.S. were ever to fall, who would all you LA ingrates be turning to thank for your next round of incoming welfare checks: China, Russia, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Islamic States -- maybe one of your own....Hugo Chavez? :rolleyes:

If you want the truth, I know the U.S. is far from perfect, most especially in the area of our handout policies. Familiarity isn't the only thing that breeds contempt. Free Money does, too! If it were left up to me, I'd pull the plug on our generous charity and let all LA drown in the dark depths of its poverty, in order to serve the interest of Poetic Justice!

Boxcar

[bigmack]

I understand. U.S. support of dictatorships and its direct involvement in the assassination/murder/torture of tens of thousands of civilians in support of American economic interests is your definition of "ain't perfect." What definitely "ain't perfect" is what lives in your heart and conscience.
What country do you reside?

[Tom]

Whatever! Although I must say it is a hoot watching Americans squirm and piss and moan over the leaked documents. Your "snit" is hysterical. As I said earlier: Bravo Mr. Assange - Thank you.

Wow. The idea of confidentiality totally escapes you, huh?
Have you no integrity?

Snit? No, sir, it's called concern that there will be ramifications for some that were honest. When you get over your arrogance, you might understand how the real world works. You applaud a man who is totally without integrity or ethics and who puts many people and indeed nations at risk for a lousy buck? That says much about you.

And for your information, since your knowledge here seems to be severely limited, it a concern shared around the world, not just Americans.

How can you lower yourself to post here with us criminals?
Do us a favor, don't bother. You won't be missed at all.:ThmbDown::ThmbDown::ThmbDown:

[Tom]

What country do you reside?

Assistan.

[JustRalph]

Assistan.

I think that would be "asnostan" in Latin America

[Steve R]

Wow. The idea of confidentiality totally escapes you, huh?
Have you no integrity?

Snit? No, sir, it's called concern that there will be ramifications for some that were honest. When you get over your arrogance, you might understand how the real world works. You applaud a man who is totally without integrity or ethics and who puts many people and indeed nations at risk for a lousy buck? That says much about you.

And for your information, since your knowledge here seems to be severely limited, it a concern shared around the world, not just Americans.

How can you lower yourself to post here with us criminals?
Do us a favor, don't bother. You won't be missed at all.:ThmbDown::ThmbDown::ThmbDown:
How dare you even mention integrity? The U.S. Ambassador to Honduras informed the U.S. government that the coup d'etat which ousted President Zelaya (a wealthy conservative who, after his election, tried to better the lives of the poor in his country) was unequivocally illegal and unconstitutional. Knowing this, the Obama administration still publicly recognized and supported the new dictatorship even though the other members of the OAS refused. As residents of Central America, should we ever again trust the U.S. to support freedom and democracy in this region of the world? You, sir, are a jingoist and a hypocrite.

And you worry about "ramifications"? What about the "ramifications" inflicted on innocent people around the world as a result of these documents? Perhaps by your moral standards a thousand dead Iraqi children aren't worth the life of one American soldier. Perhaps not. But if you believe that the public has no right to know about the duplicitous behavior of their so-called "public servants", then you are essentially a 21st century "good German".

As a further testament to your hypocrisy, and recalling a very good comment from another poster, I wonder how outraged you would be about confidentiality if these documents were Russian, Chinese or North Korean. I'm guessing not at all.

One thing I find continually fascinating about Americans is their faux public dedication to democratic ideals - until they open their mouths, and that applies to many citizens as well as government officials. One of the most significant revelations from the documents is something widely understood but now, for the first time, confirmed in writing. And that is a long history of the U.S. fully supporting brutal dictatorships that protect American interests while helping to destroy democratically-elected governments that do not. You know nothing about integrity or ethical behavior. And if you think Assange did this for money, then you truly are one of Billy Joe Armstrong's American idiots.

[bigmack]

One thing I find continually fascinating about Americans is their faux public dedication to democratic ideals
Tell us of your Banana Republic country so we can paint your ass with an equally broad brush as you so ignorantly do here.

[Tom]

How dare you even mention integrity?

I am very sorry, Steve, How rude of me.
I just assumed you were familiar with the term.
Here, try this.......

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/integrity

[JustRalph]

Rumors that Wiki Leaks has possession of a couple of stolen hard drives from the executive offices of Bank of America and they are the next target.

This is going to be the end of people being able to carry Thumb Drives and Ipods into their workplaces.

[BlueShoe]

Hypothetically, can someone who is not a citizen of a country be a traitor to another country?
When they commit an act of war against you without a formal declaration of such, then that makes the perpetrator a terrorist. The last time I checked, Australia had not declared war against us. Im with Tom on this one. The hell with crashing the website, we should instead crash the people involved in running it. Like the old intel saying goes, "Terminate with extreme prejudice". If I were JA, I would be looking at real estate in Alice Springs or some other remote place. This guy has painted a target on his ass, and someone is going to hit it pretty soon. One of our elite special ops teams could settle this nice and quietly with no fuss. The thing is, with the present leadership (?) they will never get the go signal.:(

[boxcar]

Tell us of your Banana Republic country so we can paint your ass with an equally broad brush as you so ignorantly do here.

He won't do that. He's afraid I'll form powerful lobby to lobby Congress against foreign aid to whatever armpit of the world he resides. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[highnote]

Seems like Assange committed war against the world and is a terrorist-- by your definition.

I'm not sure I would call it that, but I can see how you can see it that way.

To me, a terrorist kills people with bombs or weapons. But I suppose people may die of his actions. However, that is just collateral damage. I wouldn't call it terrorism. Terrorism is intended to make people afraid. I'm not afraid.




When they commit an act of war against you without a formal declaration of such, then that makes the perpetrator a terrorist. The last time I checked, Australia had not declared war against us. Im with Tom on this one. The hell with crashing the website, we should instead crash the people involved in running it. Like the old intel saying goes, "Terminate with extreme prejudice". If I were JA, I would be looking at real estate in Alice Springs or some other remote place. This guy has painted a target on his ass, and someone is going to hit it pretty soon. One of our elite special ops teams could settle this nice and quietly with no fuss. The thing is, with the present leadership (?) they will never get the go signal.:(

[JustRalph]

WikiLeaks: Interpol issues wanted notice for Julian Assange
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange facing growing legal problems around world

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/30/interpol-wanted-notice-julian-assange

[ArlJim78]

Now they are really going after this Assanger guy, but where was everyones anger when he leaked the defense secrets much earlier in the year? I have to laugh that yesterday Obama announces that they were starting some tough new policy about access to information and leaking. What took so long? He has had this stuff for six months. the time to spring in to action has long since passed.
Where were the tough measures to prevent him from making the leaks in the first place? It's like everything else, the threats to NorKo, the threats to Iran, it's all bark and no bite.

[redshift1]

WikiLeaks: Interpol issues wanted notice for Julian Assange
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange facing growing legal problems around world

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/30/interpol-wanted-notice-julian-assange


You know what the sex crimes are ...right

[boxcar]

You know what the sex crimes are ...right

You did mean to say "alleged", right? Sweden hasn't even brought any formal charges against this whackjob.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Computer/data security has been a joke for years. There needs to be an international standard that is mandatory for anyone handling this type of data, just like the ISO and AE standards for manufacturing.

JR, thumb drives are not the problem - no secure system should allow ANY downloading to any medium. That this one soldier sat there and stole all those docs so easily shows our military is extremely lax. Not only them.

[redshift1]

You did mean to say "alleged", right? Sweden hasn't even brought any formal charges against this whackjob.

Boxcar

Once again, do you know what the actual "alleged" or not accusations are?

[delayjf]

As a resident of Latin America, I am fully aware of the sordid history of American murder and corruption in this part of the world in support of the United Fruit Company and its iterative descendants. Here, we understand very well the "full wrath" of the U.S. military, and although you have had the support of some Latin American fascist leaders over the years, I can assure you that the vast majority of the people in Central and South have no love for the United States. "Yanqui go home" is alive and well.

No doubt the US had a hand in a lot of bad things that went down in Latin America, but ultimately the responsibility for most of the death and misery that occurred falls at the feet of Latin Americans themselves, on both sides of the political spectrum. One example, I hear a lot of complaints about the Contra’s and the death squads – but the Sandinistas used death squads as well.

Latin Americans who hate the US can take solace in the amount of death, misery and pain they have imported into the US via the drug trade.

[boxcar]

Once again, do you know what the actual "alleged" or not accusations are?

That's not what you asked originally. Go back and decipher your own poorly worded scribble, and don't bore me with your stupid questions.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

On this, I am totally in sync with Krauthammer (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/02/AR2010120204561.html). Our response to this is pathetic.


The WikiLeaks document dump is sabotage, however quaint that term may seem. We are at war - a hot war in Afghanistan where six Americans were killed just this past Monday, and a shadowy world war where enemies from Yemen to Portland, Ore., are planning holy terror. Franklin Roosevelt had German saboteurs tried by military tribunal and shot. Assange has done more damage to the United States than all six of those Germans combined. Putting U.S. secrets on the Internet, a medium of universal dissemination new in human history, requires a reconceptualization of sabotage and espionage - and the laws to punish and prevent them. Where is the Justice Department?

[nijinski]

On radio news I heard a report tonight that he fears being killed by the US and that he he wants us to be held blamed if he dies.
Also that everything on file would comeout if this happened.
If this is true we may dealing with a paranoid schizophrenic terrorist.
The guy is like the plague.

[bigmack]

The guy is like the plague.
The Blue Bonnet?

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/BlueBonnetcopy.jpg

I need a rim shot over here!

[riskman]

Rumors that Wiki Leaks has possession of a couple of stolen hard drives from the executive offices of Bank of America and they are the next target.

This is going to be the end of people being able to carry Thumb Drives and Ipods into their workplaces.

WikiLeaks plans to release a U.S. bank's documents
WASHINGTON | Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:52pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The founder of whistle-blower website WikiLeaks plans to release tens of thousands of internal documents from a major U.S. bank early next year, Forbes Magazine reported on Monday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AS68S20101129

In this world of ours, big money is more powerful than big government. I don’t think the Wikileaks people fully understand what they are about to do. These are the big banks, the rulers of the world, you can’t out them and think you can get away with it.

[Tom]

On radio news I heard a report tonight that he fears being killed by the US and that he he wants us to be held blamed if he dies.
Also that everything on file would comeout if this happened.
If this is true we may dealing with a paranoid schizophrenic terrorist.
The guy is like the plague.

Whoever kills this slug is a hero and deserves a ticker tape parade in NYC, with his worthless corpse tied to a rope and dragged behind a garbage truck. Send a clear message - you do this crap you die. End of story.

Where is the justice department? Hell, where is the CIA?

[JustRalph]

Paypal cuts off their funds

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40505216/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/

[highnote]

Does anyone else see the irony of this quote:

'Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin asked on Facebook: "Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaida and Taliban leaders?" '


I wonder if Assange will be pursued with the same urgency that the U.S. has pursued Osama Bin Laden?


Paypal cuts off their funds

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40505216/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/

[Tom]

I wonder if Assange will be pursued with the same urgency that the U.S. has pursued Osama Bin Laden?

If they do, he is a free man.

[bigmack]

He was so blustery at one point but his world is quickly getting smaller. What a shame.

He might find showering as infrequently as he does handy in a penal institution for the next 50 years as is more than likely going to be his fate.

Buh bye now.

bVGqE726OAo

[fast4522]

He was so blustery at one point but his world is quickly getting smaller. What a shame.

He might find showering as infrequently as he does handy in a penal institution for the next 50 years as is more than likely going to be his fate.

Buh bye now.

bVGqE726OAo

Hey here is another for Mike to invite back.

[Tom]

I miss bigmac!

[jocko699]

I miss bigmac!

Liked the McRib myself. :pound::pound::pound:

[Tom]

I'm waiting for a 2 for $5 deal! :p:kiss::kiss::p

[PaceAdvantage]

Hey here is another for Mike to invite back.He's one of the few I'm betting who wouldn't come back.

Or he's already been back for years...:pound: