Discussion: WikiLeaks

[enterthemadness]

Wikileaks' Embarrassing Revelations

Last week, the whistle-blower website Wikileaks released more than 250,000 pages of sensitive diplomatic notes, cables, and information from the United States government. Here is some of the information included in the mountain of documents:

• In 2008, Nicolas Sarkozy gave everyone else iPods for Christmas, but U.S. diplomats received candles
• Kim Jong-il is registered with the Writers Guild of America under the pseudonym "Roland Emmerich"
• Rahm Emanuel brushes his teeth if he eats so much as a snack
• Since the first day of his tenure, U.K. prime minister David Cameron has lobbied the Queen to knight Spacemen 3 as a band
• Threats and aid offers equally ineffective in forcing Vladimir Putin to put a shirt on during diplomatic negotiations
• Ahmadinejad has a closet with, like, 200 of those jackets
• The majority of diplomatic relations with Israel still go through comatose former prime minister Ariel Sharon
• U.S. diplomatic privacy measures are terrible

Source: Onion

Best one.

 

[Marx]

UPDATE: ASSANGE GRANTED BAIL
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/12/14/uk.assange.hearing/index.html?hpt=T1

 

[DACrowe]

Where have I done any of what you just posted?

You said:

And here we go, one of the 2 most common types of rebuttals to these "nutty theories"(and with an example of the other one by DACrowe later on that same page).

That was aimed at my extreme skepticism to another poster who claimed that Julian Assange was arrested for rape charges, because the American government wants to destroy him and discredit his WikiLeaks, so they made up the rape charges and pressured Sweden and Britain to attack. You implied that my ignoring that as a "nutty theory" was naive. So, I responded why I (and others) are so skeptical about conspiracy theories. Because usually they're not about dancing boys. They're about JFK's assassination, the moon landing, 9/11, where Obama was born, and why the world is picking on demigod Julian Assange.

And my points are still valid, even if you want to talk more about dancing boys, that is.

you say conspiracy theories are weak arguments and are rightfully met with a lot of skepticism and in the same breath you talk about "fantasies" people have in explaining the events on 9/11. News flash folks, no matter what you believe happened on 9/11, you are choosing to believe in a conspiracy theory. Think about that for a second.

No...we've seen the footage of the planes going into the buildings and Pentagon countless times from different angles. They were not fighter jets and they were not missiles. We have footage of Osama bin Laden at a dinner party (for lack of a better word) with other al-Qaeda leaders taking credit for 9/11 and talking about how they were surprised the whole of the Twin Towers collapsed, not just the top floors. And how they were celebrating their victory. We have audible evidence of what happened on Flight 93--and it didn't sound like the military shot down the plane or landed it and the FBI and CIA hauled them off to a secret place.

This is not a theory. This is fact. To pretend otherwise because Bush wanted to invade Iraq that badly (as if he couldn't just base it on a trumped up charge of WMD?) is ridiculously silly. End of story.

You're just beating around the bush with this constantly regurgitated argument of crazy conspiracy theorists and everyone who not just believes in a different world view than you, but simply acknowledges there may be a chance that it's not what it seems, falls into the same category of a complete loon. Hey, you may be right on with those accusations with a lot of people who just take off on wild tangents about things like a lizard people bloodline from another dimension running through our government in disguise, but not me.

Fair enough. I won't lump you with the Lizard-people group, I suppose.

 

[BlackLantern]

Lizard people are coming!!!!

 

[LOBO3315a]

No, they are all ready here. That's the conspiracy.

So on him getting bail, will he ever go to trial, or will the anarchist just delay the judical process past the end of his natural life?

 

[Paroxysm]

I said they posted both. But the original version was released after and buried at the bottom of the page as a link. For those who click on the sensational headlines with the word murders are going to watch the video at the top of the page which is the one selectively edited to purport a biased message that the US military is evil.

That is what I said. And it is BS. I have no respect for that.

What part of "they were released at the same time" don't you understand?

It's obvious that you're biased as hell when it comes to dealing with the **** your own country does. Have fun with that.

 

[Paroxysm]

and 9/11 was an inside job.

 

[BlackLantern]

was it the lizards?

 

[enterthemadness]

I don't believe in the theory of lizard people, 9/11 inside job, or FEMA camp. I do mostly think nwo is real though.

Also, what was the judge smoking? Giving him bail? He ain't showing up, he be gone like a villian.

 

[BlackLantern]

Ive yet to get a straight answer on what the populace would be doing in these FEMA camps...making license plates, just hanging out? what?

 

[enterthemadness]

Ive yet to get a straight answer on what the populace would be doing in these FEMA camps...making license plates, just hanging out? what?

I've heard....forced to watch LA Clippers games! OMG WHY?!

 

[LOBO3315a]

What part of "they were released at the same time" don't you understand?

It's obvious that you're biased as hell when it comes to dealing with the **** your own country does. Have fun with that.

LOOK AT THIS!!!!
look at this
Which of the 2 (yes there are 2) messages were your eyes drawn to first? They were released at the same time. Do you now understand what he is trying to tell you?

 

[Paroxysm]

LOOK AT THIS!!!!
look at this
Which of the 2 (yes there are 2) messages were your eyes drawn to first? They were released at the same time. Do you now understand what he is trying to tell you?

He's trying to tell us that they posted both. But the original version was released after". This is ********, they released both versions simultaneously.

So GTFO with your pink letters.

 

[Kelly]

How about we take it down a few notches gentlemen.....

 

[BlackLantern]

ban 'em Kel


take out the six guns

 

[LOBO3315a]

Funny, I thought the color was magenta.

I'm gonna get banned? *ACK*

 

[Kelly]

No one is getting banned, BL is just bored....

 

[enterthemadness]

I wonder if wikileaks HQ orders take out....that be a hell of a story by the delivery guy.

 

[DACrowe]

What part of "they were released at the same time" don't you understand?

It's obvious that you're biased as hell when it comes to dealing with the **** your own country does. Have fun with that.

Were they? I misunderstood your point. However, was the full clip not buried at the bottom of the page in a link that was less likely to be clicked on than the video at the top of the page with the misleading headline?

But you don't care because you are obviously biased in anything that perpetuates your belief that "America is evilz." And that is deserving of more than a facepalm or any other silly image. Now continue your little fantasies of Julian Assange as a bold, courageous folk hero speaking truth to the Empire--all while condemning possible rape victims without knowing anything of the evidence. Because they are less important than your hero, I suppose.

 

[Morg]

Espionage Act makes felons of us all
By Darlene Storm
Created Dec 13 2010 - 4:43pm

Dear Americans: If you are not "authorized" personnel, but you have read, written about, commented upon, tweeted, spread links by "liking" on Facebook, shared by email, or otherwise discussed "classified" information disclosed from WikiLeaks, you could be implicated for crimes under the U.S. Espionage Act -- or so warns a legal expert who said the U.S. Espionage Act could make "felons of us all."

As the U.S. Justice Department works on a legal case against WikiLeak's Julian Assange for his role in helping publish 250,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables, authorities are leaning toward charging Assange with spying under the Espionage Act of 1917. Legal experts warn that if there is an indictment under the Espionage Act, then any citizen who has discussed or accessed "classified" information can be arrested on "national security" grounds.

According to the Act [3], anyone "having unauthorized possession of, access to....information relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense" which "could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation" and "willfully retains" that information, can be fined or imprisoned "not more than ten years, or both."

Benjamin Wittes, who specializes in legal affairs, blogged [4], "By its terms, it criminalizes not merely the disclosure of national defense information by organizations such as Wikileaks, but also the reporting on that information by countless news organizations. It also criminalizes all casual discussions of such disclosures by persons not authorized to receive them to other persons not authorized to receive them-in other words, all tweets sending around those countless news stories, all blogging on them, and all dinner party conversations about their contents. Taken at its word, the Espionage Act makes felons of us all."

This may be why the State Department has warned certain people not to read or to discuss WikiLeak content on social media -- not unless they wished to be considered a security risk. CNN reported [5] that "unauthorized federal workers and contractors have been warned not to attempt to read the classified documents on WikiLeaks." According to [6] the recently hacked Gawker [7], an anonymous tip revealed that the U.S. military warned soldiers not to read "about the Wikileaks disclosures-or read coverage of them in mainstream news sites." Even students at Columbia University that might wish to be hired by the State Department were warned not to comment upon or post links to the WikiLeak cables.

Although Cablegate and the leaked secret cables might be embarrassing for the government, Wittes noted that the majority of them don't contain information that directly relates to "national defense." The Espionage Act does not "cover the overwhelming bulk of the material that Wikileaks disclosed," he stated.

A recent report from the Congressional Research Service [8] (CRS) suggests that there may be sufficient legal precedent to keep the news media from being held liable. The EFF stated [9], in an effort to oppose online censorship, that the CRS is a "must read" for anyone who reports on, mirrors or hosts the U.S. diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks. "Hopefully, this information will help counter much of the fear that our government's so-called 'war' against Wikileaks has generated."

...

 

[enterthemadness]

That will never hold up in court, prisons are too crowded...Americans will revolt against govt if jail/prison sentences are carried out and/or fines and the states will fight the fed govt.

 

[Paroxysm]

Were they? I misunderstood your point. However, was the full clip not buried at the bottom of the page in a link that was less likely to be clicked on than the video at the top of the page with the misleading headline?

But you don't care because you are obviously biased in anything that perpetuates your belief that "America is evilz." And that is deserving of more than a facepalm or any other silly image. Now continue your little fantasies of Julian Assange as a bold, courageous folk hero speaking truth to the Empire--all while condemning possible rape victims without knowing anything of the evidence. Because they are less important than your hero, I suppose.

You have no argument, first you claimed that WikiLeaks edited a video to make it look like American troops killed Iraqi civilians, this was false, the source had edited them. Then you went on to say WikiLeaks had posted the videos separately, this was also false, the videos were posted simultaneously.

You also claimed that the two journalists killed were carrying AK-47's 20 mins to being killed. This was also false.

You need to get your facts straight bro.

 

[DACrowe]

I did not say the journalists were carrying AK-47s and the video was edited misleadingly. I thought WikiLeaks did the editing....I was wrong and I can admit that. They merely knew it was edited with a bias they shared and put an inaccurate headline on it and put the full-length video at the bottom of the page where most people would not click to follow.

Will you admit that WikiLeaks has a bias and was misleading readers with that page? Hence why it is easy to be skeptical of their "journalism" on other issues? You still haven't proven how the women in the case are part of an international government conspiracy to silence the great Mikael Blom...er, Julian Assange.

Where is your evidence to say it is all a set-up? Bring me those facts, bro.

 

[Fading]

That will never hold up in court, prisons are too crowded...Americans will revolt against govt if jail/prison sentences are carried out and/or fines and the states will fight the fed govt.

I think it's just another scare tactic like all the "Terror code orange" stuff they were doing everyday on the news after 9/11. "Today the colors pink, better not take the bus to work today midwest!!!" (I just found terror alert colors stupid when they were still doing them months later). Except instead this is saying, "Read, and discuss all these bad things about us and spend the rest of your life in jail!"

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there were ppl who immediately swore off this whole topic after hearing that. However, if they really take that stance...then everyone in this thread is a traitor and spy going to jail....and that's just beyond ******ed. I imagine the farthest this will go is political posturing, "My opponent backed wikileaks, he's a spy to the US people!", or possibly as a catalyst to get other wikileaks members in custody while they think of more solid charges.

The funny thing to me? It's treason to read information made public by someone else by watching it off the news, or reading it in a newspaper or off the internet. However, it's not treason for politicians to send our troops in harms way and death because they continually and fruitlessly try to tie a country to the enemy terrorists who attacked us, and finally say they have a feeling a country could have weapons of mass destruction with no evidence, plunging us into a financial and resource depleting war. It's not treason for politicians to cover up and abuse our countries power, laws, and everything it stands for for self gain. Ect., ect. Our ideas of treason must be different inbetween our civilians and politicians, because to me treason is actively having done something bad enough to warrant a crime with the intent of causing our country harm, where I see the wikileaks thing as ppl simply reading things put in public display. It's like a government official drawing a pic of George Washington with tiny Swaztika on each of his wooden teeth, someone else getting a hold of that pic and super imposing it on a bilboard, and then that government official threatening treason on anyone that looks at it.

 

[Marx]

I just read that Michael Moore posted Assange's bail?