Wikileaks release of more classified US documents

Alica I can be as civil or as nasty as the next guy. That said, you know damn well I respect your abilities. I just don't cotton to the release of ANY information that will put our troops in danger. I was subjected to what can be done to our troops at one time in my life. For those who do not accept that we have military and state secrets and they should remain so, I have no sympathy nor do I recognize the need for full disclosure of any written or said document that affects our national security. I can say it no plainer so this is the last I shall say on the subject. You are right about the demeaning conduct but I will say there are some who only understand or are affected by that kind of response. I am sorry. I do not consider you one of them.

I agree, and even if I didn't, I'd still hug your neck the next time I saw you :wave:Thank you.

tell us some more war stories

Cute.Do you have any to share?

Cute.Do you have any to share?

if i did, i wouldn't

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2033771,00.html

If this guy is alive in five years I'd be amazed. He's making an awful lot of very powerful enemies. Of course, we likely won't hear about his death, he'll just disappear.

I'm sure he's got some other worse stuff up his sleeve to keep himself alive.

Andy A and Idlewind, could you explain where your outrage was when Dick Cheney outed Valerie Plame? That not only put her life in jeopardy, but actually cost the lives of US spies. Why is Dick Cheney not on your firing squad list?

BTW, before you start acting like the past doesn't matter and that issue has passed I'll remind you that the current links aren't being attributed to deaths nor the risk of death for anyone except the author.

if i did, i wouldn't

Bob you're a jackhole sometimes.

A news outlet should never have access to classified information in the first place. The blame should be put on whoever leaked that information to them, but the media shouldn't be expected to ascertain whether or not information they receive is secret or top secret. At least they shouldn't have a legal obligation to do so. Charge the leaker with treason maybe, but not the media. There's a link on this page that has a video about Bradley Manning, the Private who leaked the information.

U.S. cable: Karzai intervened for drug traffickers - U.S. news - Security - msnbc.com

I disagree. The name WikilLeaks says it all. When they do not take the time to check their source, they become complicit and should be charged with espionage. To me, it's like not charging a drug trafficker with a crime because they only provided an outlet to the drug addict.

Guys like Assange are driven by beating the system and rival hackers because they can do it, not by true exposure, transparency or journalistic reporting, IMHO. When you take cables from officials working for governments, he knows quite well that that information is not to go beyond those walls, but he reports it anyway. He's dangerous and should be treated as such.

Bob you're a jackhole sometimes.

eat your vegetables junior

I disagree. The name WikilLeaks says it all. When they do not take the time to check their source, they become complicit and should be charged with espionage. To me, it's like not charging a drug trafficker with a crime because they only provided an outlet to the drug addict.

Guys like Assange are driven by beating the system and rival hackers because they can do it, not by true exposure, transparency or journalistic reporting, IMHO. When you take cables from officials working for governments, he knows quite well that that information is not to go beyond those walls, but he reports it anyway. He's dangerous and should be treated as such.

Has anyone actually been to wikileaks.com? I did and they clearly state that they check and verify the information. Just because you don't like what they are releasing or you considered it dangerous classified material doesn't mean that they aren't following basic reporting guidelines.

IIRC there were some reporters in the sixties that were called traitors and accused of espionage.

Wikileaks is a terrorist organization. We should act to shut the servers down by any means neccessary, seize assets, apprehend Assange, try him and shoot him. The "soldier" who leaked the documents should be tried and shot following conviction. The only way to stop treason and placing human lives in danger for no reason is to deal with it harshly.

I agree, now what should we do with these guys?

Has anyone actually been to wikileaks.com? I did and they clearly state that they check and verify the information. Just because you don't like what they are releasing or you considered it dangerous classified material doesn't mean that they aren't following basic reporting guidelines.

IIRC there were some reporters in the sixties that were called traitors and accused of espionage.

What I meant by checking the source was checking how the person submitting the info obtained the intel. Those cables they received are different than someone sending in a conference they overheard over lunch in a public place. These people submitting the info all signed confidentiality agreements when hired, especially when working for a government agency. People get this kind of intel all the time and sell it. They are called spies. Just because WikilLeaks posts it online makes them journalists?

It's interesting how Wikileaks was regarded as ok when they were releasing Bush era info. Now that the info is revealing Obama's term it's time to arrest him...

I agree, now what should we do with these guys?

Making bad decisions is not treason. Releasing classified documents that place people's lives in danger and make our foreign policy a shambles is.
SWGB, I thought the responsible party in the Plame affair went to prison.

SWGB, I thought the responsible party in the Plame affair went to prison.

Bush commuted his sentence.