Wikileaks

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Wikileaks

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Wikileaks

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Wikileaks - 11/28/2010 8:08:40 PM

FatDomDaddy

Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

Profile

Post #: 1

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 12:09:15 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

If it were that dangerous we would not have heard of it.

T

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)

Profile

Post #: 2

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 3:14:58 AM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

Indeed. I even suspect that it is a black ops directed against Hilary (as a bonus) and especially Iran.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 3

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 3:33:52 AM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Indeed. I even suspect that it is a black ops directed against Hilary (as a bonus) and especially Iran.

It is certainly strange that one guy is said to have been able to leak so much info. It is one way the thinking of various middle east regimes could be made public.

< Message edited by Politesub53 -- 11/29/2010 3:34:42 AM >

(in reply to Rule)

Profile

Post #: 4

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 8:57:45 AM

flcouple2009

Posts: 2784
Joined: 1/8/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy
OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

How so?

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)

Profile

Post #: 5

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 8:59:59 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

Just how do you perceive this as screwing the president?

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)

Profile

Post #: 6

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 9:38:38 AM

luckydawg

Posts: 2448
Joined: 9/2/2009
Status: offline

for those who don't bother to read the article we are discussing, (yet comment anyway in a rather trollish manner)

"A statement from the White House on Sunday said: “We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information.”

The White House said the release of what it called “stolen cables” to several publications was a “reckless and dangerous action” and warned that some cables, if released in full, could disrupt American operations abroad and put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk."

_____________________________

I was posting as Right Wing Hippie, but that account got messed up.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 7

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 9:43:30 AM

hertz

Posts: 1315
Joined: 8/7/2010
Status: offline

What puts American diplomats at risk is America. Can't really fix that.

(in reply to luckydawg)

Profile

Post #: 8

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 9:52:01 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

What puts American diplomats at risk is America. Can't really fix that.

He actually said it would "put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk."

The ones who get killed as 'traitors' by their own countries.

(in reply to hertz)

Profile

Post #: 9

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 9:54:26 AM

DarkSteven

Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

Odd that both you and the NYT imply that Obama is impacted by this, but that the Bush administration is not. The leaks date from 07.

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)

Profile

Post #: 10

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 10:00:11 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
Odd that both you and the NYT imply that Obama is impacted by this, but that the Bush administration is not. The leaks date from 07.

Obama is the one who has to deal with the PR, deal with foreign relations, deal with various agencies, manage the fallout and clean up the mess.

It might affect Bush's reputation, but it affects Obama's current workload.

(in reply to DarkSteven)

Profile

Post #: 11

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 10:22:36 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

for those who don't bother to read the article we are discussing, (yet comment anyway in a rather trollish manner)

Then perhaps you should read the article before you comment in such a trollish manner

"A statement from the White House on Sunday said: “We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information.”

Is this what you call "screwing the president?

The White House said the release of what it called “stolen cables” to several publications was a “reckless and dangerous action” and warned that some cables, if released in full, could disrupt American operations abroad and put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk."

Or is this what you call "screwing the president"?
Perhaps you really do not understand the difference between embarrass and screw.

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 11/29/2010 10:24:21 AM >

(in reply to luckydawg)

Profile

Post #: 12

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 10:23:56 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

What puts American diplomats at risk is America. Can't really fix that.

He actually said it would "put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk."

The ones who get killed as 'traitors' by their own countries.

It would appear that you do not believe that traitors should be punished

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 13

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 10:29:32 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
It would appear that you do not believe that traitors should be punished

No, I don't view things in terms of universal moral constants.

If someone betrays me, I punish them.

If someone betrays my enemy to help me, I reward them.

I understand that my enemy will likely feel the same way, which is why I'm aware I need to protect my sources if I want their assistance to continue.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 14

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 11:15:14 AM

PeonForHer

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

New technology should be used by governments to gather up the secrets of private citizens, not vice versa. All right-thinking people should be deeply saddened by this event. I myself haven't stopped crying all day.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)

Profile

Post #: 15

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 11:23:07 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
It would appear that you do not believe that traitors should be punished

No, I don't view things in terms of universal moral constants.

So some times it is ok to steal and other times no...sometimes it is ok to murder and other times not...some times it is ok to cheat on your husband and sometimes not....I think I understand your position.

If someone betrays me, I punish them.

If someone betrays my enemy to help me, I reward them.

I understand that my enemy will likely feel the same way, which is why I'm aware I need to protect my sources if I want their assistance to continue.

So you do not care that the president of afghanistan is a drug smugler.
You do not care that the u.s. coerced germany to not prosecute two cia kidnapper/ terrorists who kidnapped a german citizen and tortured him till they found out he was the wrong "habib"

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 16

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 11:41:29 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

So some times it is ok to steal and other times no...sometimes it is ok to murder and other times not...some times it is ok to cheat on your husband and sometimes not....I think I understand your position.

I don't want to get into what's "ok" because it's hard for me to define morality, but yes, the person who steals bread for his family is more sympathetic than the corporate embezzler, the hostage who blows a terrorist's brains out with his own gun is more sympathetic than the serial killer with children's corpses in his basement, the woman whose husband has been comatose for 15 years is more sympathetic than the gold-digger who cheats with the man she really loves.

quote:

So you do not care that the president of afghanistan is a drug smugler.
You do not care that the u.s. coerced germany to not prosecute two cia kidnapper/ terrorists who kidnapped a german citizen and tortured him till they found out he was the wrong "habib"

No, I don't really care more than on a vague, abstract level...I mean, I feel sympathy for the innocent man who was kidnapped and tortured, but I don't 'care' in the political activist sense. The people who have the power to change these things likely also have the security clearance to know about them legally.

I'm not naive and idealistic about the behind-the-scenes work of intelligence agencies. Which is why I don't think that leaked information is going to do anything more than heighten their security protocols. This is an embarrassment to the US because it's public, but it's not going to change our policies or tactics.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 17

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 12:03:57 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

So some times it is ok to steal and other times no...sometimes it is ok to murder and other times not...some times it is ok to cheat on your husband and sometimes not....I think I understand your position.

I don't want to get into what's "ok" because it's hard for me to define morality, but yes, the person who steals bread for his family is more sympathetic than the corporate embezzler,

Of course getting a job and earning the price of a loaf of bread would be out of the question.

the hostage who blows a terrorist's brains out with his own gun is more sympathetic than the serial killer with children's corpses in his basement,

Are you trying to equate self defense with murder?

the woman whose husband has been comatose for 15 years is more sympathetic than the gold-digger who cheats with the man she really loves.

I believe the phrase in the marriage vow is "till death do us part"

quote:

So you do not care that the president of afghanistan is a drug smugler.
You do not care that the u.s. coerced germany to not prosecute two cia kidnapper/ terrorists who kidnapped a german citizen and tortured him till they found out he was the wrong "habib"

No, I don't really care more than on a vague, abstract level...I mean, I feel sympathy for the innocent man who was kidnapped and tortured, but I don't 'care' in the political activist sense.

So if it were you who was kidnapped and tortured you would not be upset if the u.s. government got oz to not prosecute your kidnappers? Ain't you just the sweetest thang.

The people who have the power to change these things likely also have the security clearance to know about them legally.

I'm not naive and idealistic about the behind-the-scenes work of intelligence agencies. Which is why I don't think that leaked information is going to do anything more than heighten their security protocols. This is an embarrassment to the US because it's public, but it's not going to change our policies or tactics.

Ever hear of the pentagon papers?
50,000 + body bags with american corpses in them for a lie. How many more will the current lie bring us?

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 18

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 12:14:50 PM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

We disagree on the fundamental principles and I doubt any casual chat will change your mind. Or mine for that matter.

I'm curious though, with your "wrong is wrong" position on traitors and thieves, how do you feel about Pfc. Bradley Manning, who hacked into secure servers, stole information he should not have had access to, and gave it to Wikileaks? And how do you feel about Wikileaks receiving and publishing that stolen information?

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 19

RE: Wikileaks - 11/29/2010 12:18:06 PM

FatDomDaddy

Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

Odd that both you and the NYT imply that Obama is impacted by this, but that the Bush administration is not. The leaks date from 07.