Wikileaks and the Case of the Algerian Reporter

World • Views: 32,783

One of the questions that constantly comes up in discussions about Wikileaks is whether their document dumps have actually put anyone in danger.

I’m surprised there hasn’t been more written about it, but the fact is that an Algerian reporter has already been put in harm’s way by the latest release of diplomatic cables: How many sources has WikiLeaks put at risk?

Despite warnings from the U.S. government that the publication of secret diplomatic cables could put the local reporters and human rights activists identified in them at risk, WikiLeaks this week published the name of an Algerian reporter who accused Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika of manipulating a 2006 parliamentary election during talks with American diplomats, according to a journalists’ rights group.

The reporter’s name was redacted on Thursday, two hours after the New York-based advocacy group, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), asked a lawyer representing WikiLeaks, Mark Stephens, to remove it. The disclosure shows that despite measures by WikiLeaks and some news organizations to prevent exposure of individuals at risk, some vulnerable names continue to slip through the cracks.

How safe do you think this unnamed reporter feels today? If I were him, I’d have taken my family and fled the country. Even without a name (and the unedited cables are available all over the Internet) it would be a simple matter for the Algerian secret service to find out which reporter had spoken with US diplomats.

That’s one less journalist brave enough to speak out against government corruption in Algeria, and one less journalist who’s likely to ever trust the US to keep a secret again. He (or she) has been effectively silenced. Is that what Wikileaks is for?

And ironically, this is exactly the kind of person who might one day have been able to expose the wrongdoing of the Algerian government, perhaps with leaked documents posted at Wikileaks.

Wikileaks is sabotaging their own mission, if they’re truly interested in exposing all government malfeasance and not simply focusing on easy targets like the United States. Julian Assange’s mammoth ego, political bias, and blithe irresponsibility has undoubtedly wreaked havoc in the life of this reporter and his/her family.

But what do the little people matter when you’re changing the world?

Jump to bottom

511 comments
1 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:31:47pm

It’s all about the people. The human interaction of this is the most important part. That’s what I’ve been trying to say for a long time now.

People reveal information to those they trust. And an institution is harder to trust than a person is.

2 jaunte  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:32:24pm

There are too many unknowns affected by indiscriminate leaks like the WL release, and the powerful aren’t the ones who wind up paying the biggest price.
littlegreenfootballs.com

3 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:34:43pm

I don’t think that if you try to tally up the collateral damages caused by (wanna-be-)revolutionaries and the regimes they try to topple, you will ever come to a just end. In fact, there is no end, no end of times at which to stop counting — there is just always some who are in power and some who are not. I also don’t think there is anything such as perfect justice or perfect freedom. Mistakes were made, very regrettable mistakes. Does that mean the world would have been a better place without any action at all? It’s a lot of hypotheticals…

4 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:41:22pm

re: #1 Obdicut

It’s all about the people. The human interaction of this is the most important part. That’s what I’ve been trying to say for a long time now.

People reveal information to those they trust. And an institution is harder to trust than a person is.

Obdi, your a sane head, may I ask your view?

The mainstream media seems to have no issue printing these leaks.
If Manning gave the info to a media who shared it and published it would we be going after them.

Or has this entire argument come down to ‘because its wikileaks’, and we don’t except them as being part of the media?

5 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:41:40pm

There will be far fewer brave souls willing to come forward, knowing they and their families might be put at risk.

As a result, fewer people and anti government groups will be able to rely on us for help- and that will just prolong the life of these oppressive regimes.

And for the record, I do not consider the ‘news organizations’ of these regimes as legitimate or as equal to our own and western journalists. They are the merely propaganda machines of these regimes.

6 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:43:58pm

re: #4 ozbloke

If Manning gave the info to a media who shared it and published it would we be going after them.

Yes, as the US government went after the NYT for the Pentagon papers. Except more so, in this case, given what was revealed.

Or has this entire argument come down to ‘because its wikileaks’, and we don’t except them as being part of the media?

To me, they’re exactly like the rest of the media— either editing stuff to distort it or mindlessly reporting stuff without any context or editorial oversight.

I do think that there’s a level of idiocy of going after Wikileaks on its own, unless Assange actually solicited information from Manning or others. That is a large, outstanding question.

7 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:44:44pm

re: #5 researchok

There will be far fewer brave souls willing to come forward, knowing they and their families might be put at risk.

As a result, fewer people and anti government groups will be able to rely on us for help- and that will just prolong the life of these oppressive regimes.

And for the record, I do not consider the ‘news organizations’ of these regimes as legitimate or as equal to our own and western journalists. They are the merely propaganda machines of these regimes.

you put me in the awkward position of supporting our own media, damnit.

8 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:45:08pm

re: #4 ozbloke

Obdi, your a sane head, may I ask your view?

The mainstream media seems to have no issue printing these leaks.
If Manning gave the info to a media who shared it and published it would we be going after them.

Or has this entire argument come down to ‘because its wikileaks’, and we don’t except them as being part of the media?

I would be infuriated if the media published this stuff originally, yes.

9 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:48:09pm

re: #8 SanFranciscoZionist

I would be infuriated if the media published this stuff originally, yes.

Since it seems that 99% of the document dump served no purpose except antagonizing us and our allies.

10 Randall Gross  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:50:52pm

The responsible media published it with names redacted so the arg is moot Oz.

11 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:51:36pm

re: #7 brookly red

you put me in the awkward position of supporting our own media, damnit.

I only wish we had the foresight to bomb the hell out of Der Sturmer, Das Schwarze Korps- or the film lots that produced some of the vile and virulent hate.

12 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:52:19pm

re: #10 Thanos

The responsible media published it with names redacted so the arg is moot Oz.

It’s not really moot; many of the cables have enough info to identify people even with the names redacted.

13 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:55:42pm

re: #6 Obdicut

Yes, as the US government went after the NYT for the Pentagon papers. Except more so, in this case, given what was revealed.


It seems that wikileaks has become the target as they appear to be in the middle of Manning and the media.
So if it was the Guardian who was in the middle as opposed to the NYT , do you think we would be going after them with the veracity we do with Assange?


To me, they’re exactly like the rest of the media— either editing stuff to distort it or mindlessly reporting stuff without any context or editorial oversight.


Watchout, that sort of sentiment is likely to get you classed as a supporter of wikileaks, it didn’t even take that much for me.


I do think that there’s a level of idiocy of going after Wikileaks on its own, unless Assange actually solicited information from Manning or others. That is a large, outstanding question.


I have stated that same position in multiple posts.

14 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:57:09pm

re: #8 SanFranciscoZionist

I would be infuriated if the media published this stuff originally, yes.

Hello SFZ
Why, because its classified?

15 Randall Gross  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:57:44pm

The other effect besides that on the individuals who will actually be killed, tortured, maimed, or tyrants, AQAM, or other evil interests is on the fence sitters. You see them in every conflict no matter where. They are neutral and will stay neutral as long as they lack long term security.

They will work with either side in the conflict, but the conflict never gets resolved until the majority of fence sitters actually picks a side and they won’t pick a side unless they feel they will be secure in the long term.

Wikileaks makes everyone insecure, and the fence sitters are paying attention.

16 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:59:52pm

re: #10 Thanos

The responsible media published it with names redacted so the arg is moot Oz.

Hi Thanos,
I have left a comment for you after you had commented on my page.

Hasn’t that been also true for the most part by wikileaks?
Didn’t they offer to work with the government to redact names?

17 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:00:02pm

re: #5 researchok

There will be far fewer brave souls willing to come forward, knowing they and their families might be put at risk.

As a result, fewer people and anti government groups will be able to rely on us for help- and that will just prolong the life of these oppressive regimes.

And for the record, I do not consider the ‘news organizations’ of these regimes as legitimate or as equal to our own and western journalists. They are the merely propaganda machines of these regimes.

There might be fewer people coming forward if they fear they are getting exposed by coming foward. The key point that is too seldomly critically talked about is a technological aspect that is at core: the anonimity. WikiLeaks promises that, at least to the leakers themselves. But it does not matter if WikiLeaks promises it. It could be anybody. The technology to provide for that is as reproducable and easily disseminated as the information that is leaked. In simple terms: It got leaked because it got harvested prior to that. I don’t think this will change much. For those coordinating the data collection, it is still going to be more convenient than going Amish, even if they fail to keep the data secret every once in a while.

18 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:01:12pm

re: #13 ozbloke

So if it was the Guardian who was in the middle as opposed to the NYT , do you think we would be going after them with the veracity we do with Assange?

I assume you mean ferocity. However, in that case the newspaper would be actually located, fully, in one country. I think we’d be bringing enormous political weight to bear on the UK in that circumstance, yes. And I bet they would, too.


Watchout, that sort of sentiment is likely to get you classed as a supporter of wikileaks, it didn’t even take that much for me.

No, it’s really not. There is a wide, disparate amount of views on Wikileaks here, and I really, really, really fucking wish people would stop saying it was one way or the other.

I have stated that same position in multiple posts.

That’s nice. However, it should be noted that the government does not, actually, have any legal necessity to prosecute everyone involved. It really can choose to make an example of someone and hope the others fall in line. I don’t think that’s fair, or just, but it is legally allowed.

19 Randall Gross  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:01:18pm

re: #12 Obdicut

It’s not really moot; many of the cables have enough info to identify people even with the names redacted.

This is true, point well made. On the other hand it’s quite a stretch to think current congress or administration would allow going after secondary publishing outlets. At most Manning will get put away, and perhaps some of the leaders at Wikileaks since they are the primary purveyors. I left you some links to prior espionage cases at the bottom of that page you posted, did you get a chance to check them out?

20 Randall Gross  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:03:20pm

re: #16 ozbloke

Hi Thanos,
I have left a comment for you after you had commented on my page.

Hasn’t that been also true for the most part by wikileaks?
Didn’t they offer to work with the government to redact names?

Sorry but they released the names, they are responsible for their actions.

21 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:04:11pm

This is so simple to me. Protect your communications. If they are not protected I am not offended to see them posted. You failed.

Anything else is censorship.

22 Randall Gross  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:04:39pm

re: #19 Thanos

Sorry Obdi, the reply thread got hosed, that was for Oz.

23 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:05:30pm

re: #17 000G

There might be fewer people coming forward if they fear they are getting exposed by coming foward. The key point that is too seldomly critically talked about is a technological aspect that is at core: the anonimity. WikiLeaks promises that, at least to the leakers themselves. But it does not matter if WikiLeaks promises it. It could be anybody. The technology to provide for that is as reproducable and easily disseminated as the information that is leaked. In simple terms: It got leaked because it got harvested prior to that. I don’t think this will change much. For those coordinating the data collection, it is still going to be more convenient than going Amish, even if they fail to keep the data secret every once in a while.

I consider helping an oppressed people more important than ‘transparency’.

During the WW2, Korea and the the Cold War thousands of lives were saved because we kept secrets. Polish partisans were kept safe, Jews were smuggled out of occupied Europe and tens of thousands of eastern Europeans made their way to freedom because we kept secrets.

Had Mr Assange been around, a lot less- a lot less- of that would have happened. That said, the gulag would have been a lot bigger.

24 Randall Gross  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:06:50pm

re: #21 Stanley Sea

They did protect their cables, it took criminal acts to make them public. Could they have done a better job? Sure.

25 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:07:14pm

re: #21 Stanley Sea

This is so simple to me. Protect your communications. If they are not protected I am not offended to see them posted. You failed.

Anything else is censorship.

OK I’ll play devil’s advocate here. If I hacked into your email and copied all of your private communication and posted it on the internet would you be offended?

26 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:07:38pm

re: #14 ozbloke

Hello SFZ
Why, because its classified?

This is why.

re: #9 Varek Raith

Since it seems that 99% of the document dump served no purpose except antagonizing us and our allies.

What purpose did it serve to release the vast majority of these documents?
Only a handful were…unsavory. The rest? What purpose did it serve?

27 albusteve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:07:44pm

re: #21 Stanley Sea

This is so simple to me. Protect your communications. If they are not protected I am not offended to see them posted. You failed.

Anything else is censorship.

would ‘your’ include you?…because something is stolen doesn’t mean it’s public property

28 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:07:58pm

re: #25 Gus 802

OK I’ll play devil’s advocate here. If I hacked into your email and copied all of your private communication and posted it on the internet would you be offended?

I’d be embarrassed.

But I would look at myself as the dupe.

29 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:09:20pm

re: #28 Stanley Sea

Trying to feel this out. What if it were your medical records that had been criminally hacked?

30 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:09:22pm

re: #28 Stanley Sea

I’m sorry, but that’s a really weird position. Most of us are forced to use systems we do not have full control over.

31 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:09:49pm

re: #29 sizzleRI

Trying to feel this out. What if it were your medical records that had been criminally hacked?

Or credit card info.
Bank account numbers.

32 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:10:46pm

re: #28 Stanley Sea

I’d be embarrassed.

But I would look at myself as the dupe.

It’s your position. Your choice to see it like this. But others can’t be expected to.

33 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:11:06pm

re: #23 researchok

I consider helping an oppressed people more important than ‘transparency’.

During the WW2, Korea and the the Cold War thousands of lives were saved because we kept secrets. Polish partisans were kept safe, Jews were smuggled out of occupied Europe and tens of thousands of eastern Europeans made their way to freedom because we kept secrets.

Had Mr Assange been around, a lot less- a lot less- of that would have happened. That said, the gulag would have been a lot bigger.

Maybe so, maybe not. It really is not possible to know. What I do know is that the dam has been broken. There is no way to close this Pandora’s Box anymore, no matter how noble your intentions or how rightful the cause so far. The people actually proposing to contain Assange and his ilk now, twenty years down the road they will look like the RIAA, MPAA, etc.

34 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:11:16pm

re: #29 sizzleRI

Trying to feel this out. What if it were your medical records that had been criminally hacked?

They wouldn’t matter to the world at large (in my case since I’m not a public figure)

We are in a new information age. If the security was not in place to stop Manning from grabbing this info, they failed.

35 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:11:40pm

re: #30 Obdicut

Exactly. I am not in control of keeping all of my information private.

36 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:11:53pm

re: #14 ozbloke

Hello SFZ
Why, because its classified?

Yes. And being released with apparent randomness, and to no purpose or responsible end.

37 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:14:03pm

re: #31 Varek Raith

Or credit card info.
Bank account numbers.

The stuff that Clinton told diplomats to get from UN diplomats, you mean?

…

To be honest for a moment, though, I think the litmus test here is public interest. And sometimes even private data can be of public interest: Ahem.

38 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:14:21pm

re: #33 000G

Maybe so, maybe not. It really is not possible to know. What I do know is that the dam has been broken. There is no way to close this Pandora’s Box anymore, no matter how noble your intentions or how rightful the cause so far. The people actually proposing to contain Assange and his ilk now, twenty years down the road they will look like the RIAA, MPAA, etc.

I disagree. The American people are a lot smarter than some might imagine. They do understand that at times, secrecy is the preferred option.

I trust Obama is doing the right thing on the national security front. I understand why he wants to keep some things quiet.

39 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:14:38pm

re: #27 albusteve

would ‘your’ include you?…because something is stolen doesn’t mean it’s public property

when information is released to the internet, it’s generally defacto public property, because you cannot close pandora’s web server.

40 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:14:50pm

re: #37 000G

The stuff that Clinton told diplomats to get from UN diplomats, you mean?

…

To be honest for a moment, though, I think the litmus test here is public interest. And sometimes even private data can be of public interest: Ahem.

What was the public interest in releasing the vast majority of what Wikileaks dumped?

41 albusteve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:15:15pm

re: #39 WindUpBird

when information is released to the internet, it’s generally defacto public property, because you cannot close pandora’s web server.

it wasn’t released, it was stolen

42 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:15:17pm

re: #22 Thanos

Sorry Obdi, the reply thread got hosed, that was for Oz.

Yes, I did see your links, I mentioned that in my reply to you, also noting I had left you a comment.

Thanks

43 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:15:49pm

re: #34 Stanley Sea

Well, yeah, we’re pretty much protected by not being important. And I agree this is a new information age. Would you support decriminalizing the hacking and disseminating of private health and financial information. A few years ago some asshole D.A. in Oklahoma attempted to subpoena the medical records from abortion providers. Ostensibly to determine if any underage rape victims had been treated and then not gone forward to prosecute. That would have disclosed the names of thousands of women who obtained abortions. Pretty good way to pressure women into not obtaining abortions. Doesn’t seem right to me.

44 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:15:49pm

You all did see that the Air Force is now blocking access to the NYT, the Guardian and 23 other pubs that published the leaks?

This is what I’m afraid of. Govt. censorship.

I also dislike how this became a personal assault on Assage. He’s an ass. But arresting him for something completely unrelated to the outrage against him is so suspicious to me.

Again, I’m looking at this very simplistically, I very much enjoy reading all of you here with your detailed points. Don’t taze me ok?

45 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:15:54pm

re: #38 researchok

I disagree. The American people are a lot smarter than some might imagine. They do understand that at times, secrecy is the preferred option.

I trust Obama is doing the right thing on the national security front. I understand why he wants to keep some things quiet.

I am afraid that this is out of the hands of the American people.

46 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:01pm

re: #28 Stanley Sea

I’d be embarrassed.

But I would look at myself as the dupe.

It’s not that theoretical either. In Russian blogosphere there’s this hacker whose schtick is to break into famous’ people’s emails and post the contents online. He hacked some pretty decent people (along with the rest ;) ). OK, they weren’t exactly techies. In some sense it was their fault, but only in the minimal sense. This is so regardless of whether the analogy can be extended past the individuals to the government (which indeed should know better and employ the best protection).

47 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:02pm

It’s all about the information!

Youtube Video

Sneakers rules


(anyone else a big enough geek to notice the line in the trailer that isn’t in the film?)

48 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:04pm

re: #45 000G

I am afraid that this is out of the hands of the American people.

I don’t see a groundswell of people demanding Obama become more transparent.

49 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:07pm

re: #43 sizzleRI

Well, yeah, we’re pretty much protected by not being important. And I agree this is a new information age. Would you support decriminalizing the hacking and disseminating of private health and financial information. A few years ago some asshole D.A. in Oklahoma attempted to subpoena the medical records from abortion providers. Ostensibly to determine if any underage rape victims had been treated and then not gone forward to prosecute. That would have disclosed the names of thousands of women who obtained abortions. Pretty good way to pressure women into not obtaining abortions. Doesn’t seem right to me.

Absolutely not. Law is law. We deal with it that way.

50 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:17pm

Fine.
Let’s just release all our most secret weapon’s designs to the world.
Nothing bad could possibly come from this.
Let’s publish the names of all our covert agents around the world.
Nothing bad could possibly come from this.
Secrecy is bad.
9_9

51 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:33pm

re: #44 Stanley Sea

This is what I’m afraid of. Govt. censorship.

The Air Force is already heavily censored.


I also dislike how this became a personal assault on Assage. He’s an ass. But arresting him for something completely unrelated to the outrage against him is so suspicious to me.

it’s not suspicious to me that a guy who seems a bit of an ass might behave in a way to get him arrested for sexual impropriety. The charges may or may not have validity.

52 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:47pm

re: #40 Varek Raith

What was the public interest in releasing the vast majority of what Wikileaks dumped?

Staying with the example that I provided, what was the public interest in releasing 627 email messages from a private mailbox for the US Nazi party, the National Socialist Movement?

53 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:57pm

re: #26 Varek Raith

This is why.

re: #9 Varek Raith

What purpose did it serve to release the vast majority of these documents?
Only a handful were…unsavory. The rest? What purpose did it serve?

I’m not sure where you are coming from.
I happen to think most media is full of info that serves no purpose.
It doesn’t stop them from printing it.

54 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:18:30pm

re: #41 albusteve

it wasn’t released, it was stolen

Stolen. And then released. My language is correct.

it was STOLEN by a man with a Lady gaga jewel box.

It was RELEASED on the internet.

if it wasn’t released, we’d never know any of this :-)

55 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:19:38pm

This is from LGF Pages - Berkeley City Council to vote tonight on whether to declare Bradley Manning a “hero” - Includes the resolution

Peace and Justice commissioner, Thyme Siegel, is on record as having said “considering what we have all heard about the Taliban, I think it’s highly likely someone’s been murdered over these leaks…” Thyme Siegel voted no on the recommendation.

A question that could be asked is to what degree is Wikileaks, etc., are culpable for such actions? Is outing individuals in sensitive positions a morally acceptable practice? Normally journalists redact all identities in sensitive stories.

56 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:19:42pm

re: #48 researchok

I don’t see a groundswell of people demanding Obama become more transparent.

I don’t think you understand what I said. But on that note of yours…

57 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:19:57pm

re: #51 Obdicut

The Air Force is already heavily censored.

it’s not suspicious to me that a guy who seems a bit of an ass might behave in a way to get him arrested for sexual impropriety. The charges may or may not have validity.

I think pretty much any strong personality with a measure of power and arrogance is going to be more likely to behave like a boor in this regard

58 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:20:02pm

re: #54 WindUpBird

Stolen. And then released. My language is correct.

it was STOLEN by a man with a Lady gaga jewel box.

It was RELEASED on the internet.

if it wasn’t released, we’d never know any of this :-)

Upding for managing to bring Lady Gaga into a serious discussion about privacy.

59 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:20:35pm

re: #54 WindUpBird

i didn’t know he had a Lady Gaga jewel box. He is also a little monster?

60 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:20:41pm

re: #32 Sergey Romanov

It’s your position. Your choice to see it like this. But others can’t be expected to.

Finally, in some cases the people were hacked who couldn’t have done anything to prevent this type of attack. In one case the hacker forged a copy of a person’s passport and sent it to the pass recovery, posing himself as the mail account’s owner. How do you protect yourself against that?

61 albusteve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:20:47pm

re: #54 WindUpBird

Stolen. And then released. My language is correct.

it was STOLEN by a man with a Lady gaga jewel box.

It was RELEASED on the internet.

if it wasn’t released, we’d never know any of this :-)

yes, I know your language is correct, but that’s all

62 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:21:09pm

re: #56 000G

I don’t think you understand what I said. But on that note of yours…

Obama isn’t being deliberately transparent.

63 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:21:16pm

Such naiveté.

64 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:21:23pm

re: #51 Obdicut

The Air Force is already heavily censored


it’s not suspicious to me that a guy who seems a bit of an ass might behave in a way to get him arrested for sexual impropriety. The charges may or may not have validity.

But this is a new censorship in direct correlation to Wikileaks. A government reaction of censorship.

65 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:02pm

re: #63 Varek Raith

Such naiveté.

Could I interest you in a unicorn?

/

66 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:03pm

re: #63 Varek Raith

Such naiveté.

Dangerous naiveté.

67 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:24pm

re: #65 Gus 802

Check your email

68 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:24pm

re: #64 Stanley Sea

But this is a new censorship in direct correlation to Wikileaks. A government reaction of censorship.

Yes. Within the Air Force. Of materials, some of which, are classified.

Government censorship for realz is taking it out of the eye of the public, not out of the eye of military personnel.

69 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:50pm

re: #59 prairiefire

i didn’t know he had a Lady Gaga jewel box. He is also a little monster?

Oh the things we know!!

70 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:52pm

re: #66 researchok

Dangerous naiveté.

“Cutting off the nose to spite the face.”

71 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:23:02pm

re: #65 Gus 802

Could I interest you in a unicorn?

/

Can I make burgers out of it???

72 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:23:21pm

re: #64 Stanley Sea

But this is a new censorship in direct correlation to Wikileaks. A government reaction of censorship.

It’s pretty much a formality. Public knowledge does not override the declassification process. They can’t permit internal spread without endorsing the breach. Too late careful.

73 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:23:31pm

re: #58 researchok

Upding for managing to bring Lady Gaga into a serious discussion about privacy.

That’s my favorite detail :D

Probably would arise less suspicion than smuggling out the leak inside the record sleeve of the Stooges’ Raw Power on vinyl

74 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:23:58pm

re: #44 Stanley Sea

You all did see that the Air Force is now blocking access to the NYT, the Guardian and 23 other pubs that published the leaks?

This is what I’m afraid of. Govt. censorship.

I also dislike how this became a personal assault on Assage. He’s an ass. But arresting him for something completely unrelated to the outrage against him is so suspicious to me.

Again, I’m looking at this very simplistically, I very much enjoy reading all of you here with your detailed points. Don’t taze me ok?

Well, sort of. It isn’t really about blocking papers who are reporting the information or the story about wikileaks but they are blocking sites which are posting copies of the documents themselves. It makes it very difficult and confusing for IT and security to be finding copies of stolen documents on government computers. It makes investigations and security very difficult.

75 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:24:04pm

re: #73 WindUpBird

That’s my favorite detail :D

Probably would arise less suspicion than smuggling out the leak inside the record sleeve of the Stooges’ Raw Power on vinyl

OK, that was good.

Very good.

76 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:24:12pm

re: #67 researchok

Check your email

OK. Ask away. In the email that is.

77 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:25:17pm

re: #74 Killgore Trout

Well, sort of. It isn’t really about blocking papers who are reporting the information or the story about wikileaks but they are blocking sites which are posting copies of the documents themselves. It makes it very difficult and confusing for IT and security to be finding copies of stolen documents on government computers. It makes investigations and security very difficult.

I’m guessing they cannot do the NYT crossword on their break anymore.

I just don’t like censorship. That’s my bottom line.

78 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:26:55pm

re: #77 Stanley Sea


I just don’t like censorship. That’s my bottom line.


It’s not censorship.

79 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:27:02pm

re: #74 Killgore Trout

Well, sort of. It isn’t really about blocking papers who are reporting the information or the story about wikileaks but they are blocking sites which are posting copies of the documents themselves. It makes it very difficult and confusing for IT and security to be finding copies of stolen documents on government computers. It makes investigations and security very difficult.

Time to scale the whole internet thing back to ARPANET and start over, I guess.

80 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:27:06pm

re: #75 researchok

OK, that was good.

Very good.

I gotta work, I’ll leave you with one of my favorite things on the whole internet, a videocassette recording from 20 years ago of Voivod covering Search and Destroy

Youtube Video
81 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:28:58pm

re: #80 WindUpBird

I gotta work, I’ll leave you with one of my favorite things on the whole internet, a videocassette recording from 20 years ago of Voivod covering Search and Destroy


[Video]

There was a time I’d pay to go to concerts like that.

Hell, even I can’t believe it…..

82 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:29:09pm

re: #77 Stanley Sea

I’m guessing they cannot do the NYT crossword on their break anymore.

I just don’t like censorship. That’s my bottom line.

I don’t like censorship either but I draw the line on secret and classified information. They are not meant for public release and I don’t care if Wikileaks received it as stolen property. I would have been willing to let the video release they entitled “Collateral Murder” get a free pass but their release of which amounted to a massive document dump was grossly irresponsible.

83 eastwald  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:30:07pm

I think history will prove you wrong on this on Charles.

84 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:30:33pm

re: #82 Gus 802

I don’t like censorship either but I draw the line on secret and classified information. They are not meant for public release and I don’t care if Wikileaks received it as stolen property. I would have been willing to let the video release they entitled “Collateral Murder” get a free pass but their release of which amounted to a massive document dump was grossly irresponsible.

Exactly- and even the Pentagon Papers were vetted and verified six ways from Sunday before they were published.

85 eastwald  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:31:03pm

I swear that “on” had an e at the end. Oh well :(

86 albusteve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:31:16pm

re: #83 eastwald

I think history will prove you wrong on this on Charles.

who’s history is the question, eh?

87 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:31:21pm

re: #83 eastwald

I think history will prove you wrong on this on Charles.

Funny, I think history will look poorly upon what Assange is doing.

88 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:31:53pm

I’m going back to reading mode. I really cannot argue your points. You are all very correct. This is a very very interesting event to disseminate. I guess I’m just going from the gut.

I don’t feel like I’m up to LGF caliber at this point.

89 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:32:47pm

re: #88 Stanley Sea

I’m going back to reading mode. I really cannot argue your points. You are all very correct. This is a very very interesting event to disseminate. I guess I’m just going from the gut.

I don’t feel like I’m up to LGF caliber at this point.

It’s kind of fun, though, no?
:)

90 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:33:07pm

re: #88 Stanley Sea

I’m going back to reading mode. I really cannot argue your points. You are all very correct. This is a very very interesting event to disseminate. I guess I’m just going from the gut.

I don’t feel like I’m up to LGF caliber at this point.

You do understand that none of us really knows what he’s talking about?

91 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:33:23pm

re: #89 Varek Raith

It’s kind of fun, though, no?
:)

Absolutely. That’s what I get from this site. KNOWLEDGE and new ways to think.

92 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:33:37pm

re: #87 Varek Raith

Funny, I think history will look poorly upon what Assange is doing.

I think that it is good to get computer security tightened up at the government level. I hope the history books will say this was a turning point for that.

93 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:33:49pm

re: #88 Stanley Sea

I’m going back to reading mode. I really cannot argue your points. You are all very correct. This is a very very interesting event to disseminate. I guess I’m just going from the gut.

I don’t feel like I’m up to LGF caliber at this point.

Hey, you aren’t alone here- the matter has many facets and possible outcomes, all of which might be plausible.

FWIW, I look at this from an ethical.moral standpoint as opposed to a political one.

94 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:34:02pm

re: #89 Varek Raith

It’s kind of fun, though, no?
:)

Always.

95 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:34:05pm

re: #90 Decatur Deb

I know what Varek is talking about, and he knows what I’m talking about, but neither of us know what ourselves are talking about.

96 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:34:25pm

re: #90 Decatur Deb

You do understand that none of us really knows what he’s talking about?

Perfect. Three pointer, all net.

97 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:35:14pm

re: #95 Obdicut

I know what Varek is talking about, and he knows what I’m talking about, but neither of us know what ourselves are talking about.

Pretty much!

98 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:36:57pm

re: #82 Gus 802

I don’t like censorship either but I draw the line on secret and classified information. They are not meant for public release and I don’t care if Wikileaks received it as stolen property. I would have been willing to let the video release they entitled “Collateral Murder” get a free pass but their release of which amounted to a massive document dump was grossly irresponsible.

Gus,
Is there ever a time to release secret and/or classified information?
You trust all governments that much?

99 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:37:00pm

re: #88 Stanley Sea

I feel the same way. I step in for a bit, it goes over my head, and I duck back out.

100 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:37:15pm

re: #84 researchok

Exactly- and even the Pentagon Papers were vetted and verified six ways from Sunday before they were published.

It had a purpose or a story to tell.

101 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:37:38pm

This is where Assange goes too far. Here he did more damage than good.

102 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:37:40pm

re: #23 researchok

I consider helping an oppressed people more important than ‘transparency’.

During the WW2, Korea and the the Cold War thousands of lives were saved because we kept secrets. Polish partisans were kept safe, Jews were smuggled out of occupied Europe and tens of thousands of eastern Europeans made their way to freedom because we kept secrets.

Had Mr Assange been around, a lot less- a lot less- of that would have happened. That said, the gulag would have been a lot bigger.

.loose lips sink ships….

103 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:38:46pm

re: #88 Stanley Sea

I’m going back to reading mode. I really cannot argue your points. You are all very correct. This is a very very interesting event to disseminate. I guess I’m just going from the gut.

I don’t feel like I’m up to LGF caliber at this point.

Jump in the waters fine, wave you arms a lot a flail like me.

104 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:39:10pm

re: #98 ozbloke

Gus,
Is there ever a time to release secret and/or classified information?
You trust all governments that much?

Assange believes that no information should be classified.
Do you subscribe to this?
And why would you trust wikilieaks? They’ve lied in the past…

105 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:39:34pm

re: #89 Varek Raith

It’s kind of fun, though, no?
:)

ECHO CHAMBER!
ECHO CHAMBER!
echo chamber!
echo chamber!

///

106 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:40:38pm

Why did Hitler just shoot down Santa?
And why did Jesus save Santa?
Why were they flying biplanes?
/Colbert Report.

107 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:41:51pm

re: #98 ozbloke

Gus,
Is there ever a time to release secret and/or classified information?
You trust all governments that much?

I thought I answered that. The video in question could be argued as relevant to public knowledge. My Lai would be another example. IOW, if it is beyond a reasonable doubt that our action were immoral.

I would probably apply a different standard if we were engaged in high level military activity such as WWII. In that instance, I don’t think it would have been beneficial to report on the killing of German POWs which took place a few times during that war.

108 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:43:07pm

re: #107 Gus 802

An even better example would be publishing Patton and Monty’s private messages to Eisenhower. If those had been released, the Alliance might have fallen apart. If nothing else, it would have intensified the conflicts.

109 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:44:25pm

re: #108 Obdicut

An even better example would be publishing Patton and Monty’s private messages to Eisenhower. If those had been released, the Alliance might have fallen apart. If nothing else, it would have intensified the conflicts.

And in one of the previous threads I gave perhaps the most extreme examples of all. During the war but the US and UK made a conscious decision to “bury” the Katyn story. It was the right decision at that time.

110 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:44:59pm

re: #104 Varek Raith

Assange believes that no information should be classified.
Do you subscribe to this?
And why would you trust wikilieaks? They’ve lied in the past…

First off you presume I trust wikileaks, I have never said that.
The fact that you know they have lied in the past should tell you something.

I tell you what I don’t want, I don’t want an organization that has no accountability to be decide what they think should or should not be released.

I do want whistle blowers to have an outlet.

Have you ever seen a whistle blown that you have supported?

111 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:45:06pm

re: #105 Sergey Romanov

echo chamber

112 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:45:14pm

re: #108 Obdicut

An even better example would be publishing Patton and Monty’s private messages to Eisenhower. If those had been released, the Alliance might have fallen apart. If nothing else, it would have intensified the conflicts.

Yes. And troop morale. Which is something else that people would have to consider.

113 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:46:44pm

re: #112 Gus 802

Yes. And troop morale. Which is something else that people would have to consider.

well I guess sometime you have to take sides… & I am OK with that.

114 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:47:23pm

re: #107 Gus 802

I thought I answered that. The video in question could be argued as relevant to public knowledge. My Lai would be another example. IOW, if it is beyond a reasonable doubt that our action were immoral.

I would probably apply a different standard if we were engaged in high level military activity such as WWII. In that instance, I don’t think it would have been beneficial to report on the killing of German POWs which took place a few times during that war.

So we agree, there are times when the public’s interest outweighs that of a government and what it has classified as secret.

115 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:48:07pm

re: #110 ozbloke

First off you presume I trust wikileaks, I have never said that.
The fact that you know they have lied in the past should tell you something.

I tell you what I don’t want, I don’t want an organization that has no accountability to be decide what they think should or should not be released.

I do want whistle blowers to have an outlet.

Have you ever seen a whistle blown that you have supported?

Just as you presumed Gus trusted the government.
;)

What whistles were blown by this massive document dump? Why didn’t wikileaks just leak the documents that may have contained criminal activity. Why release documents that contained no criminal activity, like the vast majority of the document dump?

116 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:48:14pm

re: #110 ozbloke

re: #87 Varek Raith

Funny, I think history will look poorly upon what Assange is doing.

I actually think history will look back on this as a turning point in technology and society. Not wikileaks per se, but this era, this late 2000’s internet leaking things, influencing elections, polarizing people through blogs, connecting artists, connecting people to stuff they want, everyone on facebook, etc.

We’re using the technology, so it’s eays to forget how amazing and all encompassing and critical to our lives that this connectivity is becoming

117 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:48:37pm

re: #109 Sergey Romanov

And in one of the previous threads I gave perhaps the most extreme examples of all. During the war but both the US and UK made a conscious decision to “bury” the Katyn story. It was the right decision at that time.

D’oh. Funny how that happens.

118 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:48:48pm

re: #114 ozbloke

So we agree, there are times when the public’s interest outweighs that of a government and what it has classified as secret.

So far, nothing wikileaks has released has nothing that meets those criteria.

Just the opposite, in fact.

119 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:49:31pm

The honest whistleblower is in the same position as the illegal civil-rights sit-in. Both risk taking their lumps, relying on history and the better nature of their fellow citizens.

120 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:49:51pm

re: #118 researchok

So far, nothing wikileaks has released has nothing that meets those criteria.

Just the opposite, in fact.

for the record I still think the whole thing smells funny…

121 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:49:55pm

re: #118 researchok

So far, nothing wikileaks has released has nothing that meets those criteria.

Just the opposite, in fact.

Geez! Why is this so hard to grasp???

122 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:50:16pm

re: #116 WindUpBird

re: #87 Varek Raith

I actually think history will look back on this as a turning point in technology and society. Not wikileaks per se, but this era, this late 2000’s internet leaking things, influencing elections, polarizing people through blogs, connecting artists, connecting people to stuff they want, everyone on facebook, etc.

We’re using the technology, so it’s eays to forget how amazing and all encompassing and critical to our lives that this connectivity is becoming

Very true.

The necessary ethics and morality as it relates to technology has yet to catch up to current realities.

Right now, we are in the Wild West.

123 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:51:21pm

I guess what makes me feel I don’t have much to contribute to the Wikileaks discussion is that I don’t really see it as a debate. Dude got a bunch of documents. Dude leaked them. Dude is now in for trouble. Nu?

124 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:51:21pm

re: #114 ozbloke

So we agree, there are times when the public’s interest outweighs that of a government and what it has classified as secret.

Right. More or less. But it also depends on what we’re engaged in which is why I brought up WWII. Hopefully we don’t have to go through another war like that again. I suppose then we could ask would it have been acceptable to make public the human toll from the B-29 fire bombings of Japan?

125 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:52:00pm

re: #123 SanFranciscoZionist

I guess what makes me feel I don’t have much to contribute to the Wikileaks discussion is that I don’t really see it as a debate. Dude got a bunch of documents. Dude leaked them. Dude is now in for trouble. Nu?

Nu.

126 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:52:00pm

re: #115 Varek Raith

Just as you presumed Gus trusted the government.
;)

What whistles were blown by this massive document dump? Why didn’t wikileaks just leak the documents that may have contained criminal activity. Why release documents that contained no criminal activity, like the vast majority of the document dump?

bcause wikileaks isn’t organized or focused in anyway, it serves raw curiosity and raw distrust.

The thing is, that raw curiosity and distrust is real, and it will never go awya. it will only get stronger. Banks do unethical things to sieze, hold, retain power. Governments. Factions within governments. Powerful families. Car companies. media companies.

And now internet phenomena itself are banding together and entering the pro wrestling ring. And they’ll do shitty stuff and be unethical and endanger people. Which of course is what all the aforementioned are doing as well.

Large groups of people, organized, can easily ignore guilt. Mob mentaility. Tribalism. The Group doesn’t care about morality. The Group notices pressure. But not morality.

127 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:52:58pm

re: #121 Varek Raith

Geez! Why is this so hard to grasp???

Because they would have to deal with that reality.

They were and are wrong about what has transpired so far.

I’m not arguing for total secrecy or censorships. There are times walls need to be breached, for sure.

Wikileaks meets no responsible criteria for breaching secrecy whatsoever.

128 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:53:25pm

re: #121 Varek Raith

Geez! Why is this so hard to grasp???

That was a dubious statement. There were cables of public interest (e.g. Shell, US meddling with the other countries’ justice systems).

129 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:53:35pm

re: #124 Gus 802

Right. More or less. But it also depends on what we’re engaged in which is why I brought up WWII. Hopefully we don’t have to go through another war like that again. I suppose then we could ask would it have been acceptable to make public the human toll from the B-29 fire bombings of Japan?

well yes, we were fighting to win…

130 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:53:44pm

If I work for a company and decide to blow the whistle regarding sexual harassment I’m not going to release 500,000 pages on everything and anything about the company. I’m going to release documents that are only relevant to my case.

131 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:54:08pm

re: #121 Varek Raith

Geez! Why is this so hard to grasp???

You don’t think anything here released was a good thing?

2006–2008
WikiLeaks posted its first document in December 2006, a decision to assassinate government officials signed by Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys.”[30] In August 2007, The Guardian published a story about corruption by the family of the former Kenyan leader Daniel arap Moi based on information provided via WikiLeaks.[235] In November 2007, a March 2003 copy of Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta detailing the protocol of the U.S. Army at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was released.[236] The document revealed that some prisoners were off-limits to the International Committee of the Red Cross, something that the U.S. military had in the past repeatedly denied.[237] In February 2008, WikiLeaks released allegations of illegal activities at the Cayman Islands branch of the Swiss Bank Julius Baer which led to the bank suing WikiLeaks and obtaining an injuction which temporarily shut down wikileaks.org.[238] The site was instantly mirrored by supporters and later that month the judge overturned his previous decision citing First Amendment concerns and questions about legal jurisdiction.[239][240] In March 2008, WikiLeaks published what they referred to as “the collected secret ‘bibles’ of Scientology,” and three days later recieved letters threatening to sue them for breach of copyright.[241] In September 2008, during the 2008 United States presidential election campaigns, the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to Sarah Palin (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee John McCain) were posted on WikiLeaks after being hacked into by members of Anonymous.[242] In November 2008, the membership list of the far-right British National Party was posted to WikiLeaks, after briefly appearing on a blog.[243] A year later, on October 2009, another list of BNP members was leaked.[244]
2009
In January 2009, WikiLeaks released 86 telephone intercept recordings of Peruvian politicians and businessmen involved in the 2008 Peru oil scandal.[245] In February, WikiLeaks released 6,780 Congressional Research Service reports[246] follwed in March, by a list of contributors to the Norm Coleman senatorial campaign[247][248] and a set of documents belonging to Barclays Bank that had been ordered removed from the website of The Guardian.[249] In July, they released a report relating to a serious nuclear accident that had occurred at the Iranian Natanz nuclear facility in 2009.[250] Later media reports have suggested that the accident was related to the Stuxnet computer worm.[251][252] In September, internal documents from Kaupthing Bank were leaked, from shortly before the collapse of Iceland’s banking sector, which led to the 2008–2010 Icelandic financial crisis. The document shows that suspiciously large sums of money were loaned to various owners of the bank, and large debts written off.[253] In October, Joint Services Protocol 440, a British document advising the security services on how to avoid documents being leaked was published by WikiLeaks.[254] Later that month, they announced that a super-injunction was being used by the commodities company, Trafigura to gag The Guardian newspaper from reporting on a leaked internal document regarding a toxic dumping incident in the Ivory Coast.[255][256] In November, they hosted copies of e-mail correspondence between climate scientists, although they were not originally leaked to WikiLeaks.[257] They also released 570,000 intercepts of pager messages sent on the day of the 11 September attacks.[258] During 2008 and 2009, WikiLeaks published the alleged lists of forbidden or illegal web addresses for Australia, Denmark and Thailand. These were originally created to prevent access to child pornography and terrorism, but the leaks revealed that other sites covering unrelated subjects were also listed.[259][260][261]
132 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:54:34pm

re: #121 Varek Raith

some of the stuff there, I’m glad they leaked. Not the diplomatic cables, but some of this stuff absolutely should have been leaked.

133 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:55:08pm

re: #128 Sergey Romanov

That was a dubious statement. There were cables of public interest (e.g. Shell, US meddling with the other countries’ justice systems).


I wish people were as pissed off at Shell as they are about Assange. *shrug*

134 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:55:10pm

re: #115 Varek Raith

Just as you presumed Gus trusted the government.
;)

What whistles were blown by this massive document dump? Why didn’t wikileaks just leak the documents that may have contained criminal activity. Why release documents that contained no criminal activity, like the vast majority of the document dump?

I though Manning was of the view that he was upset about some stuff he saw, and he felt the people had the right to this info.

Is that not what a whistle blower is?

Again, I don’t trust wikileaks as a censor to what the public should see.
But I do believe they offered the US Govt to play that role to some degree.

Also, I reckon so far I have only read maybe 10-20 documents.
I have next to no knowledge of the contents.

135 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:55:12pm

re: #132 WindUpBird

But by failing to actually make a narrative out of it, they basically might as well not have leaked it.

136 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:55:49pm

re: #128 Sergey Romanov

That was a dubious statement. There were cables of public interest (e.g. Shell, US meddling with the other countries’ justice systems).

Some were, a handful at best. But the vast majority were not.
That’s why I can’t support what Assange is doing.

137 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:56:05pm

re: #133 WindUpBird

But we already knew Shell was a bastard. Or rather, those who were interested, did. Those who aren’t, still don’t.

138 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:57:02pm

re: #136 Varek Raith

Some were, a handful at best. But the vast majority were not.
That’s why I can’t support what Assange is doing.

If Assange had leaked only the stuff that contained illegal activity, I’d be hard pressed to oppose what he was doing.

139 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:57:27pm

re: #133 WindUpBird

I wish people were as pissed off at Shell as they are about Assange. *shrug*

Nobody’s going to take “Shell” out and give it a beat down.

Nobody’s going to threaten or actually harm “Shell’s” teenage daughter.

That’s what so irresponsible here.

140 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:57:44pm

re: #118 researchok

So far, nothing wikileaks has released has nothing that meets those criteria.

Just the opposite, in fact.

You have read all the released cables?
Or is your conclusion from those of which you have heard so far?

141 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:59:21pm

re: #140 ozbloke

You have read all the released cables?
Or is your conclusion from those of which you have heard so far?

Only on what I’ve read so far.

142 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:59:55pm

re: #121 Varek Raith

Geez! Why is this so hard to grasp???

Because its not that relevant, I don’t think Assange will be charged with releasing info that wasn’t classified?

143 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:01:05pm

re: #131 WindUpBird

You do realize the posting of BNP members (a most abhorrent lot) is not unlike what McCarthy was doing, right?

144 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:01:11pm

I grew up with “snitches get stitches, and wind up in ditches” … my how the world has changed.

145 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:01:19pm

re: #138 Varek Raith

If Assange had leaked only the stuff that contained illegal activity, I’d be hard pressed to oppose what he was doing.

Exactly. My position from the start.

146 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:01:24pm

re: #135 Obdicut

But by failing to actually make a narrative out of it, they basically might as well not have leaked it.

Oh that’s true, it’s like Wikileaks is an information leaking tantrum, there doesn’t seem to be any focus there whatsoever

147 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:01:34pm

I think Shell/Wikileaks is a different issue.

148 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:02:16pm

re: #143 researchok

You do realize the posting of BNP members (a most abhorrent lot) is not unlike what McCarthy was doing, right?

Okay? And when did I say I was totally for the leaking of BNP members? I dragboxed the wiki pedia article, copypasta. My point was “is none of this valuable?”

149 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:02:39pm

re: #124 Gus 802

Right. More or less. But it also depends on what we’re engaged in which is why I brought up WWII. Hopefully we don’t have to go through another war like that again. I suppose then we could ask would it have been acceptable to make public the human toll from the B-29 fire bombings of Japan?

What if wikileaks had released info on the number and location of Irans nukes, and a list of dirt on its leaders that might bring down its government.
Would the outrage have been the same?

150 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:03:44pm

re: #149 ozbloke

What if wikileaks had released info on the number and location of Irans nukes, and a list of dirt on its leaders that might bring down its government.
Would the outrage have been the same?

And released the same way, diffused to the world at large, for the hell of it?

I don’t know about anyone else, but I prefer my espionage to have focus and a point.

151 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:04:00pm

re: #146 WindUpBird

Oh that’s true, it’s like Wikileaks is an information leaking tantrum, there doesn’t seem to be any focus there whatsoever

Wikileaks seems to consider itself as pure conduit—without thought or moral obligation. They should incorporate in Delaware.

152 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:04:58pm

re: #150 SanFranciscoZionist

And released the same way, diffused to the world at large, for the hell of it?

I don’t know about anyone else, but I prefer my espionage to have focus and a point.

And I guess I don’t have outrage. This guy does what he does. I don’t fully understand why. There’s gonna be consequences. I have no urge to protect him.

153 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:04:58pm

re: #149 ozbloke

What if wikileaks had released info on the number and location of Irans nukes, and a list of dirt on its leaders that might bring down its government.
Would the outrage have been the same?

There would have been outrage from Iran but none from the USA. If they released secret locations in the USA I would have been outraged simply because I’m an American citizen. Do I need to know the exact locations of nuclear missiles in Iran? Not really. I would hope that our own government would have that information.

154 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:05:46pm

re: #147 Gus 802

I think Shell/Wikileaks is a different issue.

My poit is the phenomena of wikileaks and the people who are part of the cloud of internet people making it go, that it’s not organized, it’s not one guy running everything. it leaks important stuff, terrible stuff, stuff that doesnt make sense to leak, stuff that does. It’s not focused, it’s not moral, it’s not finessed.

If Assange goes away, we’ll just be hearing from OPENleaks more than WIKIleaks. or from individual guys with no name we know who throw things on bittorrent. The phenomena is moving on its own power. The power that ordinary people feel when they assist in leaking this stuff, thats a visceral thrill to them.

155 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:05:51pm

re: #133 WindUpBird

I wish people were as pissed off at Shell as they are about Assange. *shrug*

I wish they were expressing their outrage at Manning, the rest of the print media and the US Govt as much as they focus on Assange.

156 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:06:04pm

re: #149 ozbloke

What if wikileaks had released info on the number and location of Irans nukes, and a list of dirt on its leaders that might bring down its government.
Would the outrage have been the same?

People versus people!

makes the world go round

157 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:06:12pm

re: #149 ozbloke

What if wikileaks had released info on the number and location of Irans nukes, and a list of dirt on its leaders that might bring down its government.
Would the outrage have been the same?

I will put this crudely, but bad guys v. the rest is not an unjustifiable double standard (at least prima facie).

158 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:06:46pm

Wikileaks released the locations of sites that the US considered vital to national security. What purpose did that leak serve?

159 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:07:15pm

re: #148 WindUpBird

Okay? And when did I say I was totally for the leaking of BNP members? I dragboxed the wiki pedia article, copypasta. My point was “is none of this valuable?”

And therein lies my point. There was no laudable motive in the release of information. It was dome simply to undermine western governments with no thought to consequences.

The danger the Algerian reporter finds himself in this post is far more important than telephone calls in Peru.

What wikileaks did was irresponsible, immoral and unethical.

160 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:07:26pm

re: #154 WindUpBird

Herostratus.

161 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:07:26pm

re: #155 ozbloke

I wish they were expressing their outrage at Manning, the rest of the print media and the US Govt as much as they focus on Assange.

Assange is a rock star. Manning isn’t. Assange is a personality, manning isn’t. Assange is the easier story, the more fun story, the foreigner, the bastard. it’s a little harder for us to come to grips with our own guy leaking stuff, our own government being very porous. it’s much easier for the news narrative to put it all on Assangue, who Obdicut as remarked looks and acts like a Bond villain :D

162 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:07:37pm

re: #158 Varek Raith

Wikileaks released the locations of sites that the US considered vital to national security. What purpose did that leak serve?

raw distrust and curiosity

163 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:08:00pm

re: #156 WindUpBird

A Windupbird…

Image: DSC_0617_2.JPG

164 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:08:30pm

re: #163 Walter L. Newton

A Windupbird…

Image: DSC_0617_2.JPG

Blogspot doesn’t allow external linking.

165 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:08:48pm

re: #162 WindUpBird

raw distrust and curiosity

In other words, it served no purpose.

166 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:09:12pm

re: #151 Decatur Deb

Wikileaks seems to consider itself as pure conduit—without thought or moral obligation. They should incorporate in Delaware.

maybe I see things too simply, but we are at war. and in war there really is no fuzzy grey area. if you step up and pick a side then it is what it is. the contact is either friendly, or not.

167 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:09:48pm

Manning isn’t an issue because everyone already knows whats going to happen to him.

The guy is screwed, for a very, very long time.

168 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:09:52pm

Purloining secret documents is an old business.
It’s the technology that lets gigabytes of data to be downloaded that has really blown this up. I blame the US Government for this fiasco.
This data should have been secure.

169 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:09:52pm

re: #160 Decatur Deb

Herostratus.

well, some of that

But not the guys who are operating to leak stuff from Shell, or stuff from banks acting unethically.

My point is still: it can’t be ascribed to one ideology. it is the act of leaking, that’s all they represent. it’s not a political party

170 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:10:27pm

re: #162 WindUpBird

I’ll try again… A Windupbird…

Image: 47794246.Paris0588.jpg

171 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:10:50pm

re: #165 Varek Raith

In other words, it served no purpose.

It serves a human desire!

172 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:11:08pm

re: #150 SanFranciscoZionist

And released the same way, diffused to the world at large, for the hell of it?

I don’t know about anyone else, but I prefer my espionage to have focus and a point.

wikileaks from what I can tell is not suppose to be in the business of espionage.
They act as a conduit between those who have info and the world.

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

173 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:01pm

re: #152 SanFranciscoZionist

And I guess I don’t have outrage. This guy does what he does. I don’t fully understand why. There’s gonna be consequences. I have no urge to protect him.

Me either.

174 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:03pm

re: #166 brookly red

maybe I see things too simply, but we are at war. and in war there really is no fuzzy grey area. if you step up and pick a side then it is what it is. the contact is either friendly, or not.

That works best if we’re always the baddest ass on the block. Even then, you don’t want to tick off everyone simultaneously.

175 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:11pm

re: #170 Walter L. Newton

AWESOME

176 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:19pm

re: #154 WindUpBird

If Assange goes away, we’ll just be hearing from OPENleaks more than WIKIleaks. or from individual guys with no name we know who throw things on bittorrent. The phenomena is moving on its own power. The power that ordinary people feel when they assist in leaking this stuff, thats a visceral thrill to them.


I know a lot of people want to believe this is some transformative movement that can’t be stopped. What we have is a temporary lapse in existing laws and extradition treaty. The problem will soon be fixed. The “visceral thrill” of leaking is only because people think they can get away with it. This will pass.

177 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:27pm

re: #168 Floral Giraffe

Purloining secret documents is an old business.
It’s the technology that lets gigabytes of data to be downloaded that has really blown this up. I blame the US Government for this fiasco.
This data should have been secure.

Absofreakinlutely.

How a PFC was able to access, much less walk out with that stuff is an outrage.

How that happened is one Congressional hearing I want to be public and broadcast wall to wall.

178 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:34pm

re: #152 SanFranciscoZionist

And I guess I don’t have outrage. This guy does what he does. I don’t fully understand why. There’s gonna be consequences. I have no urge to protect him.

yep

179 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:12:45pm

re: #153 Gus 802

There would have been outrage from Iran but none from the USA. If they released secret locations in the USA I would have been outraged simply because I’m an American citizen. Do I need to know the exact locations of nuclear missiles in Iran? Not really. I would hope that our own government would have that information.

Up ding for honesty.

180 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:13:49pm

re: #172 ozbloke

wikileaks from what I can tell is not suppose to be in the business of espionage.
They act as a conduit between those who have info and the world.

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

No, that seems to be what they do.

181 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:13:54pm

re: #174 Decatur Deb

That works best if we’re always the baddest ass on the block. Even then, you don’t want to tick off everyone simultaneously.

yeah though I walk through the valley of the shadow death I shall fear no evil… do you feel lucky?

182 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:14:34pm

re: #157 Sergey Romanov

I will put this crudely, but bad guys v. the rest is not an unjustifiable double standard (at least prima facie).

It helped me decide where not to move to.

Oh, come on, it was a joke!

183 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:15:34pm

re: #177 researchok

Absofreakinlutely.

How a PFC was able to access, much less walk out with that stuff is an outrage.

How that happened is one Congressional hearing I want to be public and broadcast wall to wall.

It all depends on how exactly he got the information and what his duties were.

A lot of routine server maintenance and administrative functions are handled by low level people because no high ranking officer or civilian wants to be the guy who babysits a program at 2am. They come in from 9 to 5 and read the status reports of the drones who worked the night shift.

184 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:15:43pm

re: #170 Walter L. Newton

re: #175 WindUpBird

Looks likeit worked for WUB. Didn’t load here (Firefox/Linux).

185 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:15:57pm

re: #176 Killgore Trout

I know a lot of people want to believe this is some transformative movement that can’t be stopped. What we have is a temporary lapse in existing laws and extradition treaty. The problem will soon be fixed. The “visceral thrill” of leaking is only because people think they can get away with it. This will pass.

The movement isn’t wikileaks, the movement is simply people who are now realizing that they like the notion of leaking information.

The only way to fix this problem is to remove the internet.

How exactly do you think our government can police the internet? How exactly do you believe that we can de-anonymize the internet? I can get in my car, drive one mile to an apartment building.

i can sit in that apartment building’s parking lot in a minivan, with a laptop, and use any of their unsecured wireless connections to do whatever I want. I can get a prepaid anonymous cell phone that can’t be traced to me.

The thing is, you seem to believe you can negate the internet itself. The internet itself is the problem. Some people will be caught, some people will go to jail. And leaking will continue, because risk is thrilling. Attacking institutions from your computer is a bewitching notion.

186 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:16:05pm

re: #180 SanFranciscoZionist

No, that seems to be what they do.

yes

187 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:16:13pm

re: #184 Decatur Deb

re: #175 WindUpBird

Looks likeit worked for WUB. Didn’t load here (Firefox/Linux).

My second one did… Windupbird

Image: 47794246.Paris0588.jpg

188 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:16:35pm

re: #184 Decatur Deb

re: #175 WindUpBird

Looks likeit worked for WUB. Didn’t load here (Firefox/Linux).

I copied the link and opened in new window. That defeats a lot of direct linking bans

189 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:16:52pm

I think Gus was the first person to notice the trend that a lot of Wikileaks supports have anti-Israel leanings. Other people are starting to notice too….
Assange’s Extremist Employees

Why is WikiLeaks employing a well-known Holocaust denier and his disgraced son?
190 laZardo  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:17:18pm

re: #9 Varek Raith

Since it seems that 99% of the document dump served no purpose except antagonizing us and our allies.

Out of the 0.5% already out?

191 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:17:19pm

re: #161 WindUpBird

Assange is a rock star. Manning isn’t. Assange is a personality, manning isn’t. Assange is the easier story, the more fun story, the foreigner, the bastard. it’s a little harder for us to come to grips with our own guy leaking stuff, our own government being very porous. it’s much easier for the news narrative to put it all on Assangue, who Obdicut as remarked looks and acts like a Bond villain :D

Well I have more good news for everyone, Assange will have a Australia QC.
Geoffrey Robertson

192 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:17:36pm

re: #189 Killgore Trout

I think Gus was the first person to notice the trend that a lot of Wikileaks supports have anti-Israel leanings. Other people are starting to notice too…
Assange’s Extremist Employees

Does Barrett Brown have anti-Israel leanings?

193 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:17:39pm

re: #189 Killgore Trout

I think Gus was the first person to notice the trend that a lot of Wikileaks supports have anti-Israel leanings. Other people are starting to notice too…
Assange’s Extremist Employees

At the same time, the usual suspects are obsessed with the idea that Wikileaks is operated by the Israelis.

194 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:17:45pm

re: #188 WindUpBird

I copied the link and opened in new window. That defeats a lot of direct linking bans

Cheater!!1! Was that the Eifelschlong?

195 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:17:52pm

re: #183 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

It all depends on how exactly he got the information and what his duties were.

A lot of routine server maintenance and administrative functions are handled by low level people because no high ranking officer or civilian wants to be the guy who babysits a program at 2am. They come in from 9 to 5 and read the status reports of the drones who worked the night shift.

If that is so, that has to change.

Seriously, heads need to roll.

This is the US, not some banana republic. We have to do it right.

196 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:00pm

Say you do reveal the secret location of an enemy position. The friendlies have that position mapped and targeted required for future a preemptive attack. If you make that location public than the enemy would relocate that position possibly to a site unknown to the friendlies requiring a re-start of intelligence gather.

If the Nazis had a machine gun emplacement in a field and the US Army knew about that location and were ready to strike going to the Nazis and telling them “pssst, they know that you’re here…” They’d move to an unknown position.

197 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:07pm

re: #185 WindUpBird

You make sure data that needs to be secure, is kept secure.
If the thieves can’t access it, it can’t be stolen.
Or you can at least minimize the damage.
“Needs to know” kind of access.

198 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:14pm

re: #185 WindUpBird

The movement isn’t wikileaks, the movement is simply people who are now realizing that they like the notion of leaking information.

The only way to fix this problem is to remove the internet.


That’s a mistaken assumption. It won’t take many arrests and people will stop. It’s very simple.

199 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:17pm

re: #190 laZardo

Out of the 0.5% already out?

So, what’re they waiting for?
If they had anything explosive they would’ve already released it.

200 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:39pm

re: #192 Walter L. Newton

Does Barrett Brown have anti-Israel leanings?

Yes, he does.

201 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:50pm

re: #189 Killgore Trout

I still think the most defining trait of the Wikileaks supporters is that they’re anti-US.

Sergey, have you heard of this dude?

Adam Ermash or Jöran Jerma?

202 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:18:59pm

re: #189 Killgore Trout

I think Gus was the first person to notice the trend that a lot of Wikileaks supports have anti-Israel leanings. Other people are starting to notice too…
Assange’s Extremist Employees

Wow. That deserves an LGF page. Good job Reason.

203 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:19:42pm

re: #198 Killgore Trout

How do you feel about the comparison to violating copyright laws over the internet? The arrests and lawsuits haven’t really stopped it at all.

204 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:19:52pm

re: #200 Killgore Trout

Yes, he does.

To be clear, that is separate and apart from a pro Palestinian stance.

205 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:20:14pm

re: #118 researchok

So far, nothing wikileaks has released has nothing that meets those criteria.

Just the opposite, in fact.

US taxpayers funded Dyncorp to throw a bacha bazi (boy play) party for Afghan police recruits. US taxpayers are being asked to pay for child rape in the furtherance of a war against terror. How is that information not relevant to the morality of our public policy decision making?

206 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:20:22pm

re: #202 Gus 802

Wow. That deserves an LGF page. Good job Reason.

I haven’t been following the story so I’ll leave this one to you. Give it a skim and check some facts before posting it. Reason is not the most reliable source.

207 laZardo  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:20:22pm

re: #199 Varek Raith

Going through 250,000 documents means you’re unfortunately not going to get them all. I can only imagine how many more errors like these would go uncorrected if they upped the posting rate.

208 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:20:42pm

re: #158 Varek Raith

Wikileaks released the locations of sites that the US considered vital to national security. What purpose did that leak serve?

It helped me decide where not to move to.

Oh, come on, it was a joke!

209 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:20:56pm

re: #208 ozbloke

It helped me decide where not to move to.

Oh, come on, it was a joke!

:)

210 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:21:15pm

re: #204 researchok

To be clear, that is separate and apart from a pro Palestinian stance.

I’m not sure of the nuance, he can explain it for himself.

211 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:21:38pm

re: #200 Killgore Trout

Yes, he does.

So… does that mean he’s pro-Palestinian?

212 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:22:00pm

re: #205 goddamnedfrank

US taxpayers funded Dyncorp to throw a bacha bazi (boy play) party for Afghan police recruits. US taxpayers are being asked to pay for child rape in the furtherance of a war against terror. How is that information not relevant to the morality of our public policy decision making?

The problem I have with wikileaks isn’t that they released top secret US documents.

It’s that they did so without discrimination. The important stuff should have been leaked. The merely embarrassing, not so much.

The items that endangered innocent lives? No.

213 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:22:30pm

re: #189 Killgore Trout

I think Gus was the first person to notice the trend that a lot of Wikileaks supports have anti-Israel leanings. Other people are starting to notice too…
Assange’s Extremist Employees

F’n WOW! I did notice Shamir’s article, but I didn’t know that ties ran so deep. I wrote about Shamir once.

214 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:22:50pm

re: #205 goddamnedfrank

For giggles, check the corporate history of Dyncorp and the bios of its honchos.

215 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:23:01pm

re: #213 Sergey Romanov

F’n WOW! I did notice Shamir’s article, but I didn’t know that ties ran so deep. I wrote about Shamir once.

I was just about to recommend you look at this.

216 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:23:20pm

re: #215 Gus 802

I was just about to recommend you look at this.

Good job Gus.

217 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:23:33pm

re: #205 goddamnedfrank

US taxpayers funded Dyncorp to throw a bacha bazi (boy play) party for Afghan police recruits. US taxpayers are being asked to pay for child rape in the furtherance of a war against terror. How is that information not relevant to the morality of our public policy decision making?

This isn’t news.

It’s been going on for a long time.

218 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:24:27pm

re: #217 researchok

It is news. It’s just not new news.

People should be outraged about it already, as they should be outraged about a ton of stuff that’s actually well-known.

219 laZardo  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:25:00pm

re: #218 Obdicut

Well-known, but not really concretely confirmed until now.

220 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:25:04pm

re: #201 Obdicut

I still think the most defining trait of the Wikileaks supporters is that they’re anti-US.

Sergey, have you heard of this dude?

Adam Ermash or Jöran Jerma?

Of course. He’s a rare breed - a Jewish, Israeli, ex-Zionist antisemite. I think I.S. is his real name, Adam Ermash is his post-baptism name and JJ is the name he uses in Sweden.

221 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:25:12pm

re: #205 goddamnedfrank

US taxpayers funded Dyncorp to throw a bacha bazi (boy play) party for Afghan police recruits. US taxpayers are being asked to pay for child rape in the furtherance of a war against terror. How is that information not relevant to the morality of our public policy decision making?

Then why not just release that?
Why the massive document dumps with little regard to redacting informants names?

222 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:25:22pm

re: #198 Killgore Trout

That’s a mistaken assumption. It won’t take many arrests and people will stop. It’s very simple.

So why do people still commit crimes?

223 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:26:32pm

re: #218 Obdicut

It is news. It’s just not new news.

People should be outraged about it already, as they should be outraged about a ton of stuff that’s actually well-known.


It is nowhere as important as the people Assange is endangering now- like the Algerian reporter.

224 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:26:51pm

re: #222 ozbloke

So why do people still commit crimes?

Good point.
Let’s stop charging people for crimes.
/
:P

225 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:27:05pm

re: #223 researchok

It is nowhere as important as the people Assange is endangering now- like the Algerian reporter.

For the sake of the all-important omelet, the eggs must be disregarded.

226 laZardo  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:27:18pm

re: #221 Varek Raith

They already did.

227 eXistenZ  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:27:42pm

re: #222 ozbloke

So why do people still commit crimes?

Becuz they think they won’t get caught?

228 Varek Raith  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:28:11pm

re: #226 laZardo

They already did.

Along with a lot of mundane diplomatic cables that served no purpose than to embarrass us.
Why release those?

229 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:28:34pm

re: #212 EmmmieG

The problem I have with wikileaks isn’t that they released top secret US documents.

It’s that they did so without discrimination. The important stuff should have been leaked. The merely embarrassing, not so much.

The items that endangered innocent lives? No.

I don’t think I could trust them to know what was important.

230 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:28:35pm

re: #222 ozbloke

So why do people still commit crimes?

/cause we keep voting for them…

231 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:28:40pm

New York mag picked it up…

WikiLeaks May Employ an Anti-Semitic Holocaust Denier

Reason magazine says it has confirmation from a WikiLeaks spokesperson that Israel Shamir, an anti-Semitic Russian-born resident of Sweden, is employed by WikiLeaks. Shamir, who also goes by the aliases Adam Ermash or Jöran Jermas, likes to write things like “Jews asked God to kill, destroy, humiliate, exterminate, defame, starve, impale Christians, to usher in Divine Vengeance and to cover God’s mantle with blood of goyim” on his website. Also on his site: a prominently displayed picture of him and Julian Assange. The original reports of Shamir’s connection to WikiLeaks came out of Swedish and Russian media outlets, but a WikiLeaks spokesman confirmed that Shamir serves as the group’s content aggregator in Russia, with the role of selecting and distributing the cables to Russian news organizations. Like the sex-crimes allegations levied at Assange by Swedish prosecutors, this latest revelation complicates the confusion over WikiLeaks. What, you thought the moral morass was going to get cleaned up? Employing someone who denies that Auschwitz was a concentration camp is one thing. Giving that person the power to disseminate, and possibly manipulate, government cables is another. In one case, it looks like Shamir’s political views influenced his on-the-job (mis)behavior…

232 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:29:59pm

BTW, the link KT gave answers my previous question as to where the Russian Reporter got the uncensored cables.

233 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:30:32pm

re: #227 eXistenZ

Becuz they think they won’t get caught?

well let us do the math… If you could steal 10 million dollars & spend 1 year in jail (if caught) would you?

234 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:30:51pm

re: #231 Gus 802

New York mag picked it up…

WikiLeaks May Employ an Anti-Semitic Holocaust Denier

Expect Barret Brown to say Shamir’s personal beliefs have nothing to do with the integrity of wikileaks.

You know, like how the German trains ran on time had nothing to do with you know who- and on time trains are what really mattered, anyway.

235 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:31:12pm

re: #233 brookly red

well let us do the math… If you could steal 10 million dollars & spend 1 year in jail (if caught) would you?

Do I get to keep the 10 million either way?

236 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:31:39pm

re: #221 Varek Raith

Then why not just release that?
Why the massive document dumps with little regard to redacting informants names?

I was addressing only the false absolutist notion presented that nothing that’s been released has been in the public’s interest. I am not locked into a binary mindset, I believe in shades of gray. Wikileaks are in no way saints, they’ve made many reckless and dangerous decisions, they also however are not suicide bombers.

237 eXistenZ  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:31:47pm

re: #233 brookly red

well let us do the math… If you could steal 10 million dollars & spend 1 year in jail (if caught) would you?

I think I would. Don’t think I would like to get raped for it though.

238 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:32:37pm

re: #235 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Do I get to keep the 10 million either way?

of course, and you get to put it on your resume too.

239 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:32:42pm

re: #236 goddamnedfrank

I was addressing only the false absolutist notion presented that nothing that’s been released has been in the public’s interest. I am not locked into a binary mindset, I believe in shades of gray. Wikileaks are in no way saints, they’ve made many reckless and dangerous decisions, they also however are not suicide bombers.

Well… that’s a relief.

240 eXistenZ  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:33:16pm

re: #235 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Do I get to keep the 10 million either way?

I should have thought of that.

241 laZardo  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:34:06pm

re: #232 Sergey Romanov

BTW, the link KT gave answers my previous question as to where the Russian Reporter got the uncensored cables.

Should probably edit your page on that to include that. I would recommend that…

242 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:34:16pm

re: #235 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Do I get to keep the 10 million either way?

/ More chance if you were wealthy to start off with.

243 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:34:39pm

re: #238 brookly red

of course, and you get to put it on your resume too.

What state and was it a violent theft or white collar? State or Federal charges?

244 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:34:45pm

BTW, Shamir is an especially slimy case.

Read this:

webcache.googleusercontent.com

245 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:34:46pm

re: #158 Varek Raith

Wikileaks released the locations of sites that the US considered vital to national security. What purpose did that leak serve?

One of them is very close to where I spend my holidays, yet it’s classified NOFORN, so I’m not supposed to know about it.

246 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:35:14pm

re: #241 laZardo

Should probably edit your page on that to include that. I would recommend that…

It’s been deleted ;)

247 laZardo  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:35:34pm

re: #246 Sergey Romanov

Oh. ):

Anyhoo, BBL class.

248 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:36:11pm

re: #223 researchok

It is nowhere as important as the people Assange is endangering now- like the Algerian reporter.

As important? To the boys being abused at the party, it is. I’m not quite sure what you mean. Child prostitution is pretty important.

249 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:36:57pm

re: #243 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

What state and was it a violent theft or white collar? State or Federal charges?

pfff… who cares what state, and the worst the charges get you is censure before you peers.

250 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:38:47pm

re: #249 brookly red

pfff… who cares what state, and the worst the charges get you is censure before you peers.

Prison was mentioned. I’m trying to determine if its Country Club or Federal Bang them in the Ass prison.

251 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:38:55pm

re: #248 Obdicut

As important? To the boys being abused at the party, it is. I’m not quite sure what you mean. Child prostitution is pretty important.

Sadly, that would occur regardless- like persecution in oppressive regimes.

This guy- and probably many, many more has been put in jeopardy because of Assange.

252 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:39:35pm

When people like Shamir have the power to distribute the uncensored cables…

253 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:40:29pm

re: #250 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Prison was mentioned. I’m trying to determine if its Country Club or Federal Bang them in the Ass prison.

dude, just pay your taxes and there will be no fedassbang… ok?

254 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:40:34pm

re: #252 Sergey Romanov

When people like Shamir have the power to distribute the uncensored cables…

I’m sure Shamir is a big defender of Assange and wikileaks.

Shocking!

255 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:42:23pm

re: #251 researchok

Sadly, that would occur regardless- like persecution in oppressive regimes.

I’m sorry, but that is, to me, shockingly blithe. American taxpayer money went to pay for child prostitution. That is fucking terrible. Saying “Well, if we weren’t paying for the child prostitutes, somebody would be”, does not make it okay. At all.

This guy- and probably many, many more has been put in jeopardy because of Assange.

They’re different. But that’s no call to be dismissive of child prostitution.

256 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:42:44pm

re: #254 researchok

He works for Wikileaks.

257 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:42:50pm

re: #254 researchok

Shamir is, but it’s neither here nor there. The question is, if WL provides people like him with the raw stuff, what happens to the raw stuff next? Given that Shamir sympathizes with the totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, it’s easy to see how all the redacting efforts, of whatever (doubtful) effectiveness they may be, are reduced to naught.

258 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:43:36pm

re: #255 Obdicut

I’m sorry, but that is, to me, shockingly blithe. American taxpayer money went to pay for child prostitution. That is fucking terrible. Saying “Well, if we weren’t paying for the child prostitutes, somebody would be”, does not make it okay. At all.

They’re different. But that’s no call to be dismissive of child prostitution.

Dismissive? When and where was I dismissive?

259 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:44:28pm

re: #258 researchok

Here:


It is nowhere as important as the people Assange is endangering now- like the Algerian reporter.

and here:


Sadly, that would occur regardless- like persecution in oppressive regimes.
260 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:46:35pm

re: #257 Sergey Romanov

Shamir is, but it’s neither here nor there. The question is, if WL provides people like him with the raw stuff, what happens to the raw stuff next? Given that Shamir sympathizes with the totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, it’s easy to see how all the redacting efforts, of whatever (doubtful) effectiveness they may be, are reduced to naught.

Agreed.

Wikileaks will give Shamir ammunition for a long time. Shamir’s hate and deceit will permeate and pollute societies and cultures for decades to come.

And Assange will be a hero to many.

261 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:46:39pm

re: #257 Sergey Romanov

I mean, I could give JA some benefit of doubt as to his intent, that he means well etc. and thus redacts the cables. But Shamir has the credibility of the amount of negative infinity.

262 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:48:55pm

re: #261 Sergey Romanov

This is just nuts. What is a dude who’s basically an authoritarian-worshipper doing allowed to work on this semi-anarchic project?

263 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:48:58pm

re: #259 Obdicut

Here:

and here:

Yes, i stand by that.

It is nowhere near as important because it happening every day there.

The lives Assange put at risk are a new and growing reality.

We know China imprisons and murders political opponents. This is not news.

If as a result of some cable, others are put in harms way, well, that is a significant difference.

264 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:49:11pm

Daddy’s boy?

That’s from the Reason article link…

According to reports in the Swedish and Russian media, the broad strokes of which have been confirmed by a WikiLeaks spokesman, Shamir serves as the group’s content aggregator in Russia, the man who “selects and distributes” the cables to Russian news organizations, according to an investigation by Swedish public radio. In the newspaper Expressen, Magnus Ljunggren, an emeritus professor of Russian literature at Gothenburg University, outlined Shamir’s close ties to WikiLeaks and his position “spreading the documents in Russia.” (The article is illustrated with a picture of Assange and Shamir in an unidentified office.)

265 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:49:36pm

Note that Shamir is also engaged in some pretty shady deals. Warning, link to David Irving’s site:

webcache.googleusercontent.com

266 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:50:00pm

re: #262 Obdicut

This is just nuts. What is a dude who’s basically an authoritarian-worshipper doing allowed to work on this semi-anarchic project?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

267 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:50:21pm

re: #223 researchok

It is nowhere as important interesting to you as the people Assange is endangering now- like the Algerian reporter.

FTFY

The Algerian Reporter seems to be your pet nugget on this discussion

What’s a little child rape? Certainly not exciting to me!

268 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:50:38pm

re: #263 researchok

It is nowhere near as important because it happening every day there.

I’m sorry, but that makes no sense. Why does the regularity of child rape make it less important?

Wouldn’t that make it actually more important?


The lives Assange put at risk are a new and growing reality.

Yes, it’s shiny and new. Why more important?


If as a result of some cable, others are put in harms way, well, that is a significant difference.

I’m sorry, you’ve totally lost me. The people put in harms way by the cables are more important than the dissidents executed by the Chinese?

269 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:51:02pm

re: #266 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

He should just be their enemy!

270 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:51:20pm

re: #251 researchok

Sadly, that would occur regardless- like persecution in oppressive regimes.

Yes, but we wouldn’t be funding the rape of children directly, under the guise of fighting terror and exporting democracy.

271 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:51:29pm

re: #262 Obdicut

This is just nuts. What is a dude who’s basically an authoritarian-worshipper doing allowed to work on this semi-anarchic project?

I don’t know about JA, but Shamir sure as hell would love the fall of the US.

272 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:51:31pm

Heh.

Image: Turk.jpg

273 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:52:20pm

re: #267 WindUpBird

FTFY

The Algerian Reporter seems to be your pet nugget on this discussion

What’s a little child rape? Certainly not exciting to me!

Sorry, but you’ll have to harder. I was never dismissive of child rape.

Are you implying I condone that?

274 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:52:28pm

re: #269 Obdicut

He should just be their enemy!

I’ve seen stranger allies.

275 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:52:46pm

re: #271 Sergey Romanov

So the similar factors remain being anti-US. And anti-Israel.

276 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:53:20pm

re: #269 Obdicut

He should just be their enemy!

Case in point:

webcache.googleusercontent.com

It appears that American power peaked in 1990s, and now it has begun to slowly decay. Megaleaks is not so much a cause as a symptom of decline. With any luck, people of good will around the world can work together to gracefully degrade the machinery of foreign domination. Americans have benefited least of all from the violent and intrusive politics of globalism. Heroic figures like Julian Assange lead us toward genuine local control and away from a Matrix-like network of conspiracies.

Genuine local control, uh huh.

277 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:53:34pm

re: #255 Obdicut

I’m sorry, but that is, to me, shockingly blithe. American taxpayer money went to pay for child prostitution. That is fucking terrible. Saying “Well, if we weren’t paying for the child prostitutes, somebody would be”, does not make it okay. At all.

They’re different. But that’s no call to be dismissive of child prostitution.

Considering how some people here lose their fucking minds about government UNIONS getting too many taxpayer dollars, it’s stunningly weird to me to go ‘Well, hey, our taxes raped kids! Happens all the time!”

278 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:53:36pm

re: #270 goddamnedfrank

Yes, but we wouldn’t be funding the rape of children directly, under the guise of fighting terror and exporting democracy.

I do not disagree.

All I said was that Assange has introduced a whole new class of victims- and that is new.

279 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:54:15pm

re: #278 researchok

That’s not all you said. You also talked about how it was more important. That’s the bit that’s rankling, man.

280 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:54:49pm

re: #276 Sergey Romanov

Hah, he referenced the Matrix like it was something with intellectual merit, he loses.

281 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:55:00pm

re: #270 goddamnedfrank

Yes, but we wouldn’t be funding the rape of children directly, under the guise of fighting terror and exporting democracy.

So why do we do business with China?

There are far more victims in that nation.

282 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:55:30pm

re: #273 researchok

Sorry, but you’ll have to harder. I was never dismissive of child rape.

Are you implying I condone that?

No. I’m implying that you just don’t consider it that important that our tax dollars go to pay for rape. because it’s not new news.

I happen to think that’s far more horrible than Algerian Reporter, which is in danger of becoming a meme to blow out any context of the discussion.

283 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:55:48pm

re: #279 Obdicut

That’s not all you said. You also talked about how it was more important. That’s the bit that’s rankling, man.

agreedified!

284 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:56:18pm

Something weird about this picture though.

Image: 1.2248782TS1291974381712_slot100slotWide75ArticleFull.jpg

The perspective on the table doesn’t line up with walls.

285 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:56:30pm

re: #280 Obdicut

Hah, he referenced the Matrix like it was something with intellectual merit, he loses.

Well, there was a whole book by some pretty good philosophers dedicated to the “Matrix philosophy”. Of course, for them it was just a springboard to engage in some nifty discussions of brain-in-a-vat problem, but still… ;-)

286 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:56:33pm

re: #277 WindUpBird

Considering how some people here lose their fucking minds about government UNIONS getting too many taxpayer dollars, it’s stunningly weird to me to go ‘Well, hey, our taxes raped kids! Happens all the time!”

Those kids are raped with or without our taxpayer dollars.

We do business in China, too.

Does that outrage you?

287 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:56:57pm

re: #270 goddamnedfrank

Yes, but we wouldn’t be funding the rape of children directly, under the guise of fighting terror and exporting democracy.

But but but this guy who runs a website! Way more important!

288 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:57:13pm

re: #282 WindUpBird

The Algerian Reporter really is very important. It’s true. Especially since it signifies a potential chilling effect on those willing to defy oppressive governments.

289 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:57:41pm

re: #284 Gus 802

Something weird about this picture though.

Image: 1.2248782TS1291974381712_slot100slotWide75ArticleF ull.jpg

The perspective on the table doesn’t line up with walls.

What’s a little photoshopping among friends?

290 Ericus58  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:57:42pm

re: #44 Stanley Sea

I’m sorry to burst your bubble - but it’s not just the “government” that is blocking/limiting access on their computers to articles or websites concerning wikileaks… it’s also major businesses/corporations. In particular, my company - if wikileaks is tagged or the headline.

291 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:57:59pm

re: #286 researchok

Those kids are raped with or without our taxpayer dollars.

We do business in China, too.

Does that outrage you?

Okay, I can’t even see the goal posts from here anymore ;-)

You’re not actually defending your assertion that The Algerian Reporter is way more important. Now we’re on china. China’s a long way from the end zone!

292 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:58:20pm

re: #281 researchok

So why do we do business with China?

There are far more victims in that nation.

Sorry, I’m not buying this realpolitik BS when it comes to child rape. Really don’t care if it hurts the US trade balance or some shit, its not something I can silently condone as policy. Any US company, that’s tax payer funded (or not) should be publicly shamed and charged for engaging in those crimes.

293 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:58:20pm

re: #286 researchok

Those kids are raped with or without our taxpayer dollars.

But in this case, they were raped with our taxpayer dollars.

I really, really, don’t understand your coldness on this. Do you honestly think the number of child prostitutes has nothing to do with the number of customers for child prostitutes, the amount of money available to spend on them?

294 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:58:44pm

re: #288 Obdicut

The Algerian Reporter really is very important. It’s true. Especially since it signifies a potential chilling effect on those willing to defy oppressive governments.

Oh I agree it’s very important! But I don’t agree that it’s a one-size-fits-all argument of the kind that researchok is employing it for.

295 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:58:49pm

re: #288 Obdicut

The Algerian Reporter really is very important. It’s true. Especially since it signifies a potential chilling effect on those willing to defy oppressive governments.

/gosh he was a tea partier?

296 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:58:56pm

re: #286 researchok

And journalists are outed by people and entities other than Wikileaks. Just because something happens all the time does not make new occurrences unimportant.

297 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:59:58pm

re: #293 Obdicut

But in this case, they were raped with our taxpayer dollars.

I really, really, don’t understand your coldness on this. Do you honestly think the number of child prostitutes has nothing to do with the number of customers for child prostitutes, the amount of money available to spend on them?


This is LITERALLy the thing that makes people hate America. Not saying that to be inflammatory, but when someone asks “why do you hate America?” And the guy responds with that, what’s the counter? “Well, they do it anyway, so we should help them out and pay them to?”

298 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:00:21pm

re: #294 WindUpBird

I just don’t think there’s really a hierarchy of truly terrible shit. People having their lives put at risk due to their courageous stands against governments, child rape, slavery— it’s all just fucking terrible.

299 jaunte  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:00:54pm

re: #292 McSpiff

Any US company, that’s tax payer funded (or not) should be publicly shamed and charged for engaging in those crimes.


And pursuing a US company shouldn’t be the end of the effort to stop the practice, either.

300 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:01:24pm

re: #297 WindUpBird

This is LITERALLy the thing that makes people hate America. Not saying that to be inflammatory, but when someone asks “why do you hate America?” And the guy responds with that, what’s the counter? “Well, they do it anyway, so we should help them out and pay them to?”

Eh, as a Canadian I don’t think my own government is automatically immune from such behavior. But I’d apply to the them the same standard I outlined for the US. I have a pretty universal “no child rape” policy.

301 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:01:41pm

re: #291 WindUpBird

Okay, I can’t even see the goal posts from here anymore ;-)

You’re not actually defending your assertion that The Algerian Reporter is way more important. Now we’re on china. China’s a long way from the end zone!

You are missing my point.

The tragedy in Afghanistan has gone on for a long time, much as the oppression in China vis a vis human rights.

Huge sums of money/taxes are spent in China- and that at the very least equals (and probably far exceeds) the human rights violations in China.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions are executed every year with many more persecuted.

Assange has created a whole new class of potential victims.

302 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:01:58pm

re: #289 researchok

What’s a little photoshopping among friends?

Seems odd. Like he might be standing too. The shadow he’s casting on Shamir is also too strong for a computer monitor. It would also have been washed out by the camera flash and that wouldn’t have cast the shadow of Assange in the direction we’re seeing.

303 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:02:00pm

re: #299 jaunte

And pursuing a US company shouldn’t be the end of the effort to stop the practice, either.

No, that’s true, but I think not directly supporting with tax dollars is a pretty good place to start.

304 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:02:38pm

re: #293 Obdicut

But in this case, they were raped with our taxpayer dollars.

I really, really, don’t understand your coldness on this. Do you honestly think the number of child prostitutes has nothing to do with the number of customers for child prostitutes, the amount of money available to spend on them?

Are you equally outraged at taxpayer money spent in China, exploiting child workers?

305 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:02:39pm

re: #301 researchok

I don’t think either he or I are missing your point.

I just don’t think your point is very good, or that it relates to what you first said— which was about importance.

306 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:02:42pm

re: #286 researchok

Those kids are raped with or without our taxpayer dollars.

We do business in China, too.

Does that outrage you?

Yes.

307 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:02:57pm

re: #301 researchok

You are missing my point.

The tragedy in Afghanistan has gone on for a long time, much as the oppression in China vis a vis human rights.

Huge sums of money/taxes are spent in China- and that at the very least equals (and probably far exceeds) the human rights violations in China.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions are executed every year with many more persecuted.

Assange has created a whole new class of potential victims.

Did you know about Dynacorp funding these practices before wikleaks released that document?

308 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:03:21pm

re: #304 researchok

Are you equally outraged at taxpayer money spent in China, exploiting child workers?

Yes.

309 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:03:34pm

re: #298 Obdicut

I do not understand this conversation. I have no urge to dismiss child rape as collateral damage based on the fact that Assange is a douchebag who placed the lives of people around the globe in danger.Just like I’m not willing to brush off rape allegations because some of what he leaked was important. Evils don’t balance out. That is not how it fucking works.

310 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:03:42pm

re: #292 McSpiff

Sorry, I’m not buying this realpolitik BS when it comes to child rape. Really don’t care if it hurts the US trade balance or some shit, its not something I can silently condone as policy. Any US company, that’s tax payer funded (or not) should be publicly shamed and charged for engaging in those crimes.

Yeah, I’d like to see them strung up as a horrible warning for others.

That won’t make me like Assange, but it would be a pleasant development.

311 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:03:47pm

Time to haul out my “Free China” placard again, I guess.

312 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:03:58pm

re: #5 researchok

There will be far fewer brave souls willing to come forward, knowing they and their families might be put at risk.

As a result, fewer people and anti government groups will be able to rely on us for help- and that will just prolong the life of these oppressive regimes.

And for the record, I do not consider the ‘news organizations’ of these regimes as legitimate or as equal to our own and western journalists. They are the merely propaganda machines of these regimes.

And that bolded part is why I refuse to rank Julian Assange with Daniel Ellesburg. Whatever you think of Ellesburg’s publication of the Pentagon Papers, he was alive to the risks publication could pose to people’s lives and took steps to ensure that he would not be publishing information that could be used to identify someone and then cause them to be harmed. Assange has done no such thing. He cares only for himself, not for others.

313 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:04:04pm

re: #302 Gus 802

Seems odd. Like he might be standing too. The shadow he’s casting on Shamir is also too strong for a computer monitor. It would also have been washed out by the camera flash and that wouldn’t have cast the shadow of Assange in the direction we’re seeing.

There are people who will frame that image- and that’s what counts.

314 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:05:01pm

re: #301 researchok

You are missing my point.

The tragedy in Afghanistan has gone on for a long time, much as the oppression in China vis a vis human rights.

Huge sums of money/taxes are spent in China- and that at the very least equals (and probably far exceeds) the human rights violations in China.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions are executed every year with many more persecuted.

Assange has created a whole new class of potential victims.

Assange is a tool. he leaked what he was fed. this whole thing smells bad.

315 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:05:25pm

re: #307 McSpiff

Did you know about Dynacorp funding these practices before wikleaks released that document?

Specifically, no.

But that in no way exonerates Assange and wikileaks.

316 Ericus58  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:05:29pm

re: #88 Stanley Sea

I’m going back to reading mode. I really cannot argue your points. You are all very correct. This is a very very interesting event to disseminate. I guess I’m just going from the gut.

I don’t feel like I’m up to LGF caliber at this point.

SS - you are always up to LGF caliber. Stay Scaly.

317 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:05:49pm

re: #304 researchok

It is possible to be outraged at many things at once!

318 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:06:04pm

re: #314 brookly red

Assange is a tool. he leaked what he was fed. this whole thing smells bad.

And he didn’t care who might get hurt.

319 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:06:26pm

re: #317 sizzleRI

It is possible to be outraged at many things at once!

Agreed.

320 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:07:57pm

two things it should not be hard for anyone to say:

1) US firms using US govt money to provide boys to local dignitarys is just flat out wrong.

2) Us firms using US govt tax breaks to exploit child workers is also plain wrong.

321 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:08:30pm

re: #315 researchok

No one is saying it exonerates Assange. We can disagree with what Assange did, and want him punished according to the legal means available, but does that mean we cannot react to what has been linked?

322 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:10:05pm

re: #320 wozzablog

3) My spelling of dignitaries was also flat out wrong.

323 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:10:23pm

re: #275 Obdicut

So the similar factors remain being anti-US. And anti-Israel.

Can you please clarify for me.

The anti-Israel line came into this thread with Killgore at #189

Have we got to a place where we are saying that if you are a supporter of wikileaks you are antisemitic?

Does it just help, or is it a prerequisite?

324 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:10:51pm

re: #321 sizzleRI

*leaked*

325 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:11:28pm

re: #323 ozbloke

Have we got to a place where we are saying that if you are a supporter of wikileaks you are antisemitic?

No. Why would you ask that?

326 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:12:29pm

re: #323 ozbloke

Can you please clarify for me.

The anti-Israel line came into this thread with Killgore at #189

Have we got to a place where we are saying that if you are a supporter of wikileaks you are antisemitic?

Does it just help, or is it a prerequisite?

C’mon. You know that Obdi, of all people, wouldn’t mean it that way.

327 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:12:33pm

I think one of my fundamental disconnects with this wikileaks exchange is that i consider Wikileaks to just be a label for an amorphous phenomenon that arises from a combination of modern information technology and modern networks, anger, curiousity, and basically human nature in general.

I hear Killgore saying “this will be fixed” or ended, or defeated, or whatever which is as completely baffling to me as someone saying that America can end the concept of love, or drug addiction. How many drug dealers do we put in jail? Did that end human curiosity for altered states? How long have drugs been felonies for possession?

As long as there is an internet, this will happen. Long after Assange is in jail or dead. Unless the internet turns into something completely different than it is now.

re BB and his arguments on WL: I don’t even remotely agree with Barrett Brown on everything, but he really doesn’t deserve some of the treatment he’s gotten here, he’s been far more patient and less combative than most people here he’s argued with, to the point where he’s just going to do his own thing on his own blog. Which, you know, whatever. But he’s made some valuable observations and he seems quite intellectually curious about the nature of changing technology and how it intersects with human behavior. I have that in common with him.

Bolded foir emphasis. So yeah, don’t always agree with him, i think his participation here is valuable. Take it as you will!

328 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:12:51pm

I’m. Hungry. BBL

329 brookly red  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:13:14pm

re: #318 researchok

And he didn’t care who might get hurt.

not his job, he is just a useful idiot who accepted whole bunch of “secret” documents & then gave them credibility by “leaking them”… this whole thing stinks & i pity the fools that buy into it. come on, how could this have happened in the real world?

330 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:15:12pm

re: #321 sizzleRI

No one is saying it exonerates Assange. We can disagree with what Assange did, and want him punished according to the legal means available, but does that mean we cannot react to what has been linked?

I do not disagree.

All I’m saying is that perspective is in order if we are to understand what we are looking at.

Dyna Corp is one company. I am not minimizing what they have done.

That said, there are thousands of companies doing business in China helped with taxpayer money. THOUSANDS.

China’s record on human rights violations is almost beyond comprehension and those human rights violations are as ugly as those anywhere else.

And we’re still funding companies to do business in China.

To me, that is the greater evil- and no, I am not minimizing what has occurred in Afghanistan.

331 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:15:23pm

re: #323 ozbloke

To be clear, what i’m saying is that among the people who are either involved directly in Wikileaks or offering Assange’s bail, there is a commanlity of anti-US and anti-Israel sentiment.

some of the anti-Israel sentiment i feel is simply anti-government sentiment, with Israel as one of the most active and visible governments in the world, out of their own necessity.

I also make the distinction between anti-Israel and antisemitic.

332 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:16:22pm

re: #315 researchok

Specifically, no.

But that in no way exonerates Assange and wikileaks.

Never suggested it did. But that document is something in my mind that should have been made public. Preferably in a joint press conference between State and the DoJ when they announced charges. I refuse to accept this as the price of doing business in Afghanistan.

333 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:16:23pm

re: #329 brookly red

not his job, he is just a useful idiot who accepted whole bunch of “secret” documents & then gave them credibility by “leaking them”… this whole thing stinks & i pity the fools that buy into it. come on, how could this have happened in the real world?

So tell us poor fools! Who profits?

334 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:16:36pm

re: #328 Gus 802

I’m. Hungry. BBL

Gruel for you tonight.

335 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:16:46pm

re: #330 researchok

You’re simply shifting around a lot.

This started with you asserting that Assange’s leak that put the ALgerian reporter were more important than the child rape.

336 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:16:55pm

re: #330 researchok

Would you support the United States stopping their relationship with China over their human rights abuses?

337 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:17:41pm

re: #330 researchok

So, its somehow immoral to stop funding child rape in Afghanistan if we don’t simultaneously stop ever action that could result in a crime? I’m not sure what if any point you’re trying to make.

338 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:17:59pm

re: #331 Obdicut

To be clear, what i’m saying is that among the people who are either involved directly in Wikileaks or offering Assange’s bail, there is a commanlity of anti-US and anti-Israel sentiment.

some of the anti-Israel sentiment i feel is simply anti-government sentiment, with Israel as one of the most active and visible governments in the world, out of their own necessity.

I also make the distinction between anti-Israel and antisemitic.

I don’t know about the people involved (those who posted bail aren’t necessarily involved in the project itself). But on Shamir Assange’s got some pretty big ‘splainin’ to do. And I don’t think he will be able to explain it satisfactorily.

339 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:18:08pm

re: #332 McSpiff

Never suggested it did. But that document is something in my mind that should have been made public. Preferably in a joint press conference between State and the DoJ when they announced charges. I refuse to accept this as the price of doing business in Afghanistan.

From your mouth to God’s ears.

340 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:18:21pm

re: #336 sizzleRI

Would you support the United States stopping their relationship with China over their human rights abuses?

Of course that would mean China would call in their markers over all our debt they bought.

341 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:18:27pm

re: #327 WindUpBird

Thanks for that post. Barrett Brown was treated with less respect than he deserved, in my opinion.

342 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:18:41pm

re: #298 Obdicut

I just don’t think there’s really a hierarchy of truly terrible shit. People having their lives put at risk due to their courageous stands against governments, child rape, slavery— it’s all just fucking terrible.

can’t argue with that, really!

My emotional state on this stuff is sorta like this: I just want our government to do fewer terrible things, and I consider a leaker doing a terrible thing to be a bit less ‘fixable” than our government doing a terrible thing. They’re both terrible. But one is an angry guy with the internet, the other is our government. One is something I have no involvement of, the other I do in some tiny way, because I’m a citizen! I’m not a citizen of Wikileaks. i’m not paying taxes to Assange. I am paying taxes to the US government.

Considering how jacked up people here get about compartively minor abuses of taxpayer funds, this should have every conservative here white hot with fury.

343 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:18:56pm

re: #320 wozzablog

two things it should not be hard for anyone to say:

1) US firms using US govt money to provide boys to local dignitarys is just flat out wrong.

2) Us firms using US govt tax breaks to exploit child workers is also plain wrong.

Quite Concur. Dynacorp couldn’t have stopped the abuse, but they should not have facilitated or funded it.

344 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:19:34pm

re: #337 McSpiff

So, its somehow immoral to stop funding child rape in Afghanistan if we don’t simultaneously stop ever action that could result in a crime? I’m not sure what if any point you’re trying to make.

This is an easy fix. Smack the company concerned as hard as the law will allow.

345 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:20:16pm

re: #341 Floral Giraffe

Thanks for that post. Barrett Brown was treated with less respect than he deserved, in my opinion.

Agreed.

346 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:20:24pm

re: #337 McSpiff

So, its somehow immoral to stop funding child rape in Afghanistan if we don’t simultaneously stop ever action that could result in a crime? I’m not sure what if any point you’re trying to make.

No, that’s not what I’m saying- or ever have said.

My point is that if we’re going to be consistent, our priority ought to be China.

Dyna Corp can be dealt with in an afternoon. The real problem is China and no one seems to care about that.

347 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:20:28pm

re: #344 SanFranciscoZionist

This is an easy fix. Smack the company concerned as hard as the law will allow.

I’ve been told making an example out of people works quite well in this very thread. This is a perfect test case IMO.

348 sizzleRI  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:20:45pm

re: #340 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I’m not advocating for it. I just think the conversation got a little turned around. Maybe I contributed.

349 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:20:50pm

re: #330 researchok

I do not disagree.

All I’m saying is that perspective is in order if we are to understand what we are looking at.

Dyna Corp is one company. I am not minimizing what they have done.

That said, there are thousands of companies doing business in China helped with taxpayer money. THOUSANDS.

China’s record on human rights violations is almost beyond comprehension and those human rights violations are as ugly as those anywhere else.

And we’re still funding companies to do business in China.

To me, that is the greater evil- and no, I am not minimizing what has occurred in Afghanistan.

Dynacorp is an extension of our government. it;s a government contractor.

it is not “just a company”.

DynCorp International[2] is a United States-based private military company (PMC) and aircraft maintenance company. DynCorp receives more than 96% of its $2 billion in annual revenues from the federal government.[3]
The corporate headquarters are in Falls Church, Virginia. However, substantially all of the company’s contracts are managed out of its office at Alliance Airport in Fort Worth, Texas.
The company has provided services for the U.S. military in several theaters, including Bolivia, Bosnia, Somalia, Angola, Haiti, Colombia, Kosovo and Kuwait.[4] DynCorp International also provided much of the security for Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai’s presidential guard and trains much of Afghanistan’s and Iraq’s fledgling police force.[5] DynCorp was also hired to assist recovery in Louisiana and neighboring areas after Hurricane Katrina.[6][7] Recently, Dyncorp and the Department of State have been criticized for not properly accounting for $1.2 billion in contract task orders authorized by the State Department to be used to train Iraqi police.[8][9] DynCorp has held one contract on every round of competition since receiving the first Contract Field Teams contract in 1951. DynCorp won the LOGCAP II contract and is one of three contract holders on the current LOGCAP IV contract.

“just a company?”

Really? That dismissive, huh? For being “just a company” we sure seem to be trusting them with a lot of critical tasks and paying them a balls-out ton of money for those tasks!

350 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:21:05pm

re: #346 researchok

No, that’s not what I’m saying- or ever have said.

My point is that if we’re going to be consistent, our priority ought to be China.

Dyna Corp can be dealt with in an afternoon. The real problem is China and no one seems to care about that.

So… let’s deal with Dyna Corp then?

351 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:21:06pm

re: #346 researchok

The real problem is China and no one seems to care about that.

Really?
No one cares?
Really?

352 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:21:20pm

re: #346 researchok

Why do you say nobody seems to care about that, when, when you asked, multiple people immediately said they cared about that?

Are you just ignoring that?

353 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:21:20pm

re: #344 SanFranciscoZionist

This is an easy fix. Smack the company concerned as hard as the law will allow.

Dyncorp is a working definition of the military/intelligence/industrial complex. It won’t be smacked. Founder: Wild Bill Donovan.

354 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:21:44pm

re: #341 Floral Giraffe

Thanks for that post. Barrett Brown was treated with less respect than he deserved, in my opinion.

Concur

355 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:22:47pm

re: #325 Obdicut

No. Why would you ask that?

My apologies Obdi, my mistake.

356 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:22:52pm

re: #349 WindUpBird

Dynacorp is an extension of our government. it;s a government contractor.

it is not “just a company”.

“just a company?”

Really? That dismissive, huh? For being “just a company” we sure seem to be trusting them with a lot of critical tasks and paying them a balls-out ton of money for those tasks!

They are a contractor for as long as they have a contract. They are a private company.

I am quite sure of the thousands of companies that do business in China, some are government contractors as well.

357 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:23:45pm

re: #331 Obdicut

I also make the distinction between anti-Israel and antisemitic.

Just so I am clear, these two are anti semites right?

Ken Loach - “Rise in anti-Semitism understandable”
Jemima Khan - “The media are largely controlled by the Jews, as is Hollywood”

358 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:23:47pm

re: #356 researchok

They are a contractor for as long as they have a contract. They are a private company.

I am quite sure of the thousands of companies that do business in China, some are government contractors as well.

How many contractors lose their contracts?

359 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:24:09pm

re: #356 researchok

They are a contractor for as long as they have a contract. They are a private company.

I am quite sure of the thousands of companies that do business in China, some are government contractors as well.

Would you support bringing charges, for the crimes outlined in the state dept cable referenced against Dyna Corp, today? Do you see any reason (china related or not) for them to not be charged?

360 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:24:32pm

re: #358 wozzablog

How many contractors lose their contracts?

I know of at least one :(

361 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:24:36pm

re: #357 Buck

Just so I am clear, these two are anti semites right?

Ken Loach - “Rise in anti-Semitism understandable”
Jemima Khan - “The media are largely controlled by the Jews, as is Hollywood”

Jemima Khan = socialite.

Post some Paris Hilton and give it the same credence please.

362 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:24:42pm

re: #352 Obdicut

Why do you say nobody seems to care about that, when, when you asked, multiple people immediately said they cared about that?

Are you just ignoring that?

I’m not ignoring anything.

I made my remark predicated on how much of this conversation comes back to Afghanistan and not China.

363 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:26:05pm

re: #360 McSpiff

I know of at least one :(

Let me guess - they were canned without charging $6 for a coke or renting out small children?.

Government contracts are like legislators - only the good die young.

364 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:26:55pm

re: #356 researchok

They are a contractor for as long as they have a contract. They are a private company.

I am quite sure of the thousands of companies that do business in China, some are government contractors as well.

That’s true. And if some misconduct of theirs turns up in the Wikileaks documents or elsewhere, I should like to see that handled as well.

I will say, however, that the fact that this particular incident—probably not unique—occurred in a war zone to which the United States is ostensibly creating the rule of law, and, in fact, a war zone which I have been told many times we had to go into to save the poor abused womenfolk, makes it a tad extra unsavory for me.

I can’t fix China for you. But I would like to not pay tax dollars so little boys can be raped. I don’t think that’s irrational, nor do I think I have to create a perfect world before saying, “Hey, let’s eff up Dynacorp!”

365 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:27:12pm

re: #363 wozzablog

Let me guess - they were canned without charging $6 for a coke or renting out small children?.

Government contracts are like legislators - only the good die young.

Heh na, just lost a contract that somehow came up for bid again. Luckily government contractors tend to flow between companies as well…

366 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:27:22pm

re: #357 Buck

Just so I am clear, these two are anti semites right?

Ken Loach - “Rise in anti-Semitism understandable”
Jemima Khan - “The media are largely controlled by the Jews, as is Hollywood”

What do you think, Buck?

367 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:27:41pm

re: #331 Obdicut

To be clear, what i’m saying is that among the people who are either involved directly in Wikileaks or offering Assange’s bail, there is a commanlity of anti-US and anti-Israel sentiment.

some of the anti-Israel sentiment i feel is simply anti-government sentiment, with Israel as one of the most active and visible governments in the world, out of their own necessity.

I also make the distinction between anti-Israel and antisemitic.

Obdi,
Thank you for your clarifacation.

368 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:27:49pm

re: #344 SanFranciscoZionist

This is an easy fix. Smack the company concerned as hard as the law will allow.

Unlikely. They’ll throw out some sacrificial lambs and pay some fines, but the company will mostly get through it thanks to greasing all the right political palms.

369 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:28:23pm

re: #364 SanFranciscoZionist

Seriously, this is a situation where doing the right thing actually takes less money and effort than doing the wrong thing! Just stop paying these guys!

370 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:28:25pm

re: #368 Dark_Falcon

Unlikely. They’ll throw out some sacrificial lambs and pay some fines, but the company will mostly get through it thanks to greasing all the right political palms.

You utter, utter cynic.

/

371 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:28:26pm

re: #368 Dark_Falcon

Unlikely. They’ll throw out some sacrificial lambs and pay some fines, but the company will mostly get through it thanks to greasing all the right political palms.

You’re right. And that makes me want to break stuff.

372 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:28:39pm

re: #358 wozzablog

How many contractors lose their contracts?

I have no idea. But i do know companies bid for contracts all the time. Sometimes they get them, sometimes they don’t.

It is also true that many companies are awarded many contracts.

The Pentagon procurement process is pretty involved, from what I hear. I’m not familiar with all the details, but from what I see where I am (NC), hundreds of companies are involved. That is especially true here in regard to high tech companies (Research Triangle Park).

373 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:28:57pm

re: #369 McSpiff

Seriously, this is a situation where doing the right thing actually takes less money and effort than doing the wrong thing! Just stop paying these guys!

Then can I punch them in the nose a couple times?

374 jaunte  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:30:41pm

re: #373 SanFranciscoZionist

Better to them pay for the rescue and treatment of the abused children.

375 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:30:53pm

re: #364 SanFranciscoZionist

That’s true. And if some misconduct of theirs turns up in the Wikileaks documents or elsewhere, I should like to see that handled as well.

I will say, however, that the fact that this particular incident—probably not unique—occurred in a war zone to which the United States is ostensibly creating the rule of law, and, in fact, a war zone which I have been told many times we had to go into to save the poor abused womenfolk, makes it a tad extra unsavory for me.

I can’t fix China for you. But I would like to not pay tax dollars so little boys can be raped. I don’t think that’s irrational, nor do I think I have to create a perfect world before saying, “Hey, let’s eff up Dynacorp!”

No argument here.

And I don’t want to see thousand of companies get tax dollars used to land contracts in China that employ child or slave labor, engage in human trafficking, etc.

376 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:31:12pm

re: #373 SanFranciscoZionist

Then can I punch them in the nose a couple times?

I also like those dunking booths that are at county fairs. What would be better is humiliation and changed behavior within their own business circles. Which is also probably less likely than a dunking booth.

377 jaunte  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:31:56pm

re: #374 jaunte

Better to them pay for the rescue and treatment of the abused children.

Better to make them pay, I mean…

378 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:32:56pm

re: #359 McSpiff

Would you support bringing charges, for the crimes outlined in the state dept cable referenced against Dyna Corp, today? Do you see any reason (china related or not) for them to not be charged?

Yes, I would absolutely like to see the Dyna people charged.

379 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:33:48pm

re: #370 wozzablog

You utter, utter cynic.

/

I’m from Chicago. Such escapes for well-connected people have happened many times here. I hate it, but I also accept that there’s not much to be done about it given politician’s propensity to whore their decisions out for campaign cash.

380 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:33:56pm

re: #361 Stanley Sea

Jemima Khan = socialite.

Post some Paris Hilton and give it the same credence please.

I am sorry? Was Paris Hilton in court With Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange this week?

Did Paris Hilton offer to help pay for Julian Assange’s bail?

Maybe I missed it…

381 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:34:00pm

re: #378 researchok

Thanks. Sometimes I need to cut through all the high minded discussion and just get to the meat of it for my own sake.

382 Interesting Times  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:34:30pm

re: #357 Buck

Just so I am clear, these two are anti semites right?

How about this member of the Texas GOP?

“We elected a house with Christian, conservative values,” SREC member John Cook wrote Tuesday morning to other SREC members. “We now want a true Christian, conservative running it. This is not about Straus*, this is about getting what the people want.”

*The Jewish candidate being objected to

383 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:35:23pm

re: #378 researchok

Hell, I’d like to see the State Department charged if they knew about this.

384 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:35:29pm

I heard Michael Moore paid $20,000 into Assange’s bail today.
Is Moore considered anti Israel or anti US here by most?

385 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:36:41pm

re: #382 publicityStunted

How about this member of the Texas GOP?

*The Jewish candidate being objected to

You are pointing out to me that there is a GOP anti semite? You think I didn’t know?

What does that have to do with ANYTHING?

386 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:37:16pm

re: #357 Buck

Those are both antisemetic expressions. I’ve seen things from Jemima Khan (who is Jewish) about reconnecting with her Jewish roots that make me hope she’ll be less stupid in the future.

But yes, I think Ken Loach is a classic British anti-Semite.

387 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:37:48pm

re: #384 ozbloke

I consider him just a publicity hog at this point. Limbaugh-esque.

388 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:38:04pm

re: #380 Buck

I am sorry? Was Paris Hilton in court With Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange this week?

Did Paris Hilton offer to help pay for Julian Assange’s bail?

Maybe I missed it…

How do you react when someone brings up Victoria Jackon in relation to the right side of the political spectrum?.
Do we automatically assume that people who are right of center all agree with her and that her word is worth a damn on any topic?

389 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:38:57pm

re: #384 ozbloke

I heard Michael Moore paid $20,000 into Assange’s bail today.
Is Moore considered anti Israel or anti US here by most?

Given his rhetoric, I’d certainly say so.

390 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:40:04pm

re: #386 Obdicut

Those are both antisemetic expressions. I’ve seen things from Jemima Khan (who is Jewish) about reconnecting with her Jewish roots that make me hope she’ll be less stupid in the future.

But yes, I think Ken Loach is a classic British anti-Semite.

Loach has long earned his bona fides in anti Semitism.

391 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:40:26pm

re: #389 researchok

Given his rhetoric, I’d certainly say so.

If you think of anything you can point me to that I can read I would be grateful.

392 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:40:38pm

re: #382 publicityStunted

How about this member of the Texas GOP?

*The Jewish candidate being objected to

John Cook clearly fails to grasp the meaning of the First Amendment or else deliberately ignores it. Either way, he serves his constituents poorly.

393 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:40:38pm

re: #380 Buck

I am sorry? Was Paris Hilton in court With Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange this week?

Did Paris Hilton offer to help pay for Julian Assange’s bail?

Maybe I missed it…

Buck, I am happy to call Jemina Khan an anti-Semite. I just don’t care that much.

394 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:41:14pm

re: #389 researchok

Given his rhetoric, I’d certainly say so.

Anti-American is such a loaded term that leads down a bad road.

Any US citizen derided as Anti-American by one group will be lauded as a great patriot by another.
(see BDS sufferers for examples)

395 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:41:20pm

re: #388 wozzablog

How do you react when someone brings up Victoria Jackon in relation to the right side of the political spectrum?.
Do we automatically assume that people who are right of center all agree with her and that her word is worth a damn on any topic?

No, not everyone who is right of center agrees with her.

She’s a bit to Palinesque for me.

396 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:41:29pm

re: #384 ozbloke

I heard Michael Moore paid $20,000 into Assange’s bail today.
Is Moore considered anti Israel or anti US here by most?

I do not know his opinions on Israel.

397 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:41:47pm

re: #385 Buck

You are pointing out to me that there is a GOP anti semite? You think I didn’t know?

What does that have to do with ANYTHING?

What does Jemima Khan have to do with anything?

398 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:42:04pm

re: #393 SanFranciscoZionist

Buck, I am happy to call Jemina Khan an anti-Semite. I just don’t care that much.

AND a close supporter of Assange… (which is what is really relevant.)

399 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:42:18pm

re: #384 ozbloke

I heard Michael Moore paid $20,000 into Assange’s bail today.
Is Moore considered anti Israel or anti US here by most?

Don’t have him on record re Israel. He is very much a Left-Right litmus test.

400 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:42:35pm

re: #386 Obdicut

Those are both antisemetic expressions. I’ve seen things from Jemima Khan (who is Jewish) about reconnecting with her Jewish roots that make me hope she’ll be less stupid in the future.

But yes, I think Ken Loach is a classic British anti-Semite.

I am crying every time I see Jemima Khan noted on this blog.

I know of her from gossip sites.

I’m laughing when I see her importance here.

401 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:42:53pm

re: #398 Buck

AND a close supporter of Assange… (which is what is really relevant.)

I think he’s just flavor of the month.

402 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:42:54pm

re: #396 SanFranciscoZionist

I do not know his opinions on Israel.

Well lets just say he took the PAL side when Jenin hit the news….

403 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:08pm

re: #398 Buck

But she’s just a socialite. She’s not someone important.

404 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:19pm

re: #400 Stanley Sea

I am crying every time I see Jemima Khan noted on this blog.

I know of her from gossip sites.

I’m laughing when I see her importance here.

She’s the one who is married to the very beautiful Pakistani guy, right?

405 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:35pm

re: #341 Floral Giraffe

Thanks for that post. Barrett Brown was treated with less respect than he deserved, in my opinion.

You were one of the Forces Of Reason on that Pages thread of his, I should have mentioned you directly :)

406 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:36pm

re: #394 wozzablog

Anti-American is such a loaded term that leads down a bad road.

Any US citizen derided as Anti-American by one group will be lauded as a great patriot by another.
(see BDS sufferers for examples)

I read his site for a while. He does seem to be pretty pro Palestinian, though of a more mild variety,

See this.

407 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:46pm

re: #398 Buck

AND a close supporter of Assange… (which is what is really relevant.)

LAME

408 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:47pm

re: #402 Buck

Well lets just say he took the PAL side when Jenin hit the news…

Notably, or just in a general knee-jerk kind of way?

409 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:43:48pm

re: #395 researchok

No, not everyone who is right of center agrees with her.

She’s a bit to Palinesque for me.

Not sure if you quite got the point.

i was trying to arbitrarily find a right wing talking head without massive depth to counter act the use of names being thrown up in relation to left group think.

410 Interesting Times  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:44:16pm

re: #385 Buck

You are pointing out to me that there is a GOP anti semite? You think I didn’t know? What does that have to do with ANYTHING?

LOL.

Maybe you’ll figure it out yourself once you answer Sergey’s question :P

Buck, if you are reading this. Just a few days ago you wondered why most Jews don’t vote for conservatives. Comment.

411 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:44:27pm

re: #400 Stanley Sea

I am crying every time I see Jemima Khan noted on this blog.

I know of her from gossip sites.

I’m laughing when I see her importance here.

See my Victoria Jackson reference :p

412 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:44:52pm

re: #397 SanFranciscoZionist

What does Jemima Khan have to do with anything?

I know you probably ween’t following the thread. She is a close friend and supporter of JA, and an antisemite.

413 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:45:02pm

re: #404 SanFranciscoZionist

She’s the one who is married to the very beautiful Pakistani guy, right?

Well, was I think. Divorce.

Holy shit that she’s given importance.

414 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:46:03pm

re: #404 SanFranciscoZionist

She’s the one who is married to the very beautiful Pakistani guy, right?

She was.

She hooked up with Hugh Grant for a while.

She had a hard time in Pakistan (Jewish origins will do that), etc.

415 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:46:28pm

re: #406 researchok

I read his site for a while. He does seem to be pretty pro Palestinian, though of a more mild variety,

See this.

Pro Palestinian does not automatically equate to anti-Israel.
The two state solution relies on a certain amount for Palestinian sovereignty.

416 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:46:38pm

re: #346 researchok

No, that’s not what I’m saying- or ever have said.

My point is that if we’re going to be consistent, our priority ought to be China.

Dyna Corp can be dealt with in an afternoon. The real problem is China and no one seems to care about that.

China is a problem that cannot be solved by us. China is more powerful than we are. We cannot magic away a country that can ruin our economy.

We can only solve the problems we have control over.

If massive private military companies with friends in extremely high places can be dealt with in an afternoon, why aren’t they?

Why is it some people here are more interested in what a blogger says (kos) about PMCs than about the damage done by PMCs and the power PMCs wield?

417 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:46:44pm

re: #410 publicityStunted

Buck, if you are reading this. Just a few days ago you wondered why most Jews don’t vote for conservatives. Comment.

and how hard is it going to be for me to find an antisemite democrat leader?

418 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:46:57pm

re: #413 Stanley Sea

Well, was I think. Divorce.

Holy shit that she’s given importance.

Well, if she is a buddy of Assange, it sort of shows who he hangs around with. Rich kids with pretensions of politics.

419 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:47:22pm

re: #385 Buck

uncle buck!

420 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:47:38pm

re: #412 Buck

I know you probably ween’t following the thread. She is a close friend and supporter of JA, and an antisemite.

Can you show that she’s a close friend?

421 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:47:50pm

re: #417 Buck

and how hard is it going to be for me to find an antisemite democrat leader?

Dunno. Give it a try, but if you come back with Cynthia McKinney, I’m gonna make you go out looking again.

422 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:48:08pm

re: #417 Buck

and how hard is it going to be for me to find an antisemite democrat leader?

Pretty hard to find anyone of that level of antisemitism.

Go for it.

423 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:48:40pm

re: #417 Buck

and how hard is it going to be for me to find an antisemite democrat leader?


Rahm Emmanuel?…………

/

424 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:49:14pm

re: #409 wozzablog

Not sure if you quite got the point.

i was trying to arbitrarily find a right wing talking head without massive depth to counter act the use of names being thrown up in relation to left group think.

The right is schizophrenic that way.

They are at once too disparate a group and at the same time can be a lumbering monolith.

It really has gotten worse.

The only one who might fit what you are talking about is Hannity. he abhorred by anyone with an IQ over 12 and loved by everyone else.

425 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:49:26pm

re: #412 Buck

Downding for deriding SFZ.

426 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:49:45pm

re: #420 Obdicut

Can you show that she’s a close friend?

She was in court with him this week and offered to pay his bail?

427 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:50:23pm

re: #421 SanFranciscoZionist

Dunno. Give it a try, but if you come back with Cynthia McKinney, I’m gonna make you go out looking again.

Jimmy Carter?

428 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:50:45pm

re: #426 Buck

She was in court with him this week and offered to pay his bail?

Could indicate that they’re buddies, or, like Moore, she could just have jumped on the bandwagon.

429 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:51:24pm

re: #426 Buck

She was in court with him this week and offered to pay his bail?

… and? I’ve offered to pay bail for people I barely know.

430 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:51:49pm

re: #427 Buck

Jimmy Carter?

You’re joking, right?

Can you come up with anyone in the modern day, please?

431 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:52:09pm

re: #419 WindUpBird

uncle buck!

Great movie. Like many John Hughes films it was set in the Chicago area, and it was great as so many of Hughes movies were.

RIP, John Candy. Thanks for all the good times and fond memories.

432 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:52:12pm

re: #427 Buck

Jimmy Carter?

His position on Israel sucks, but can you give me any anti-Semitic data from way back when he was actually a leader in the party?

433 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:52:18pm

re: #417 Buck

and how hard is it going to be for me to find an antisemite democrat leader?

Why the fuck does this devolve into antisemitism?

Why the fuck?

434 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:53:04pm

re: #430 Obdicut

You’re joking, right?

Can you come up with anyone in the modern day, please?

Cater is still active and still getting books published, so that example does have some validity.

435 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:53:46pm

re: #415 wozzablog

Pro Palestinian does not automatically equate to anti-Israel.
The two state solution relies on a certain amount for Palestinian sovereignty.

That’s where i have to disagree.

There is plenty to be critical of Israel. Plenty.

That said, the Palestinians embrace and endorse state sponsored racism, bigotry, hate and calls to genocide. School curricula, media and even state funded religious preachers spew some of the most bigotry you can imagine.

I can understand an anti Israel stance. I have no problem with that (I am critical of many of Israel’s positions). That said, a pro Palestinian position is a tacit acceptance of racism and bigotry

436 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:54:12pm

re: #434 Dark_Falcon

Cater is still active and still getting books published, so that example does have some validity.

Not really. He’s not a Democratic leader. Hasn’t been for a dog’s age.

The current Democratic party has a bunch of Jewish representatives and senators. The GOP, not so much.

437 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:54:34pm

re: #433 Stanley Sea

Why the fuck does this devolve into antisemitism?

Why the fuck?

Because someone posted a GOP leader who is an antisemite, AND someone else thought that it would explain why jews don’t vote for Republicans. So I pointed out that there are democratic anti semites, and (hard to imagine) two really good examples are not good enough.

438 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:55:12pm

re: #434 Dark_Falcon

Cater is still active and still getting books published, so that example does have some validity.

He’s active, but hardly influential in the party at this point, and his opinions on Israel are given no credence by the Democratic leadership. This isn’t to say I’m happy he’s still hanging around the Democrat’s necks, but he’s also not much of a problem.

439 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:55:28pm

re: #417 Buck

and how hard is it going to be for me to find an antisemite democrat leader?

we love you uncle buck!

440 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:55:34pm

re: #436 Obdicut

Not really. He’s not a Democratic leader. Hasn’t been for a dog’s age.

The current Democratic party has a bunch of Jewish representatives and senators. The GOP, not so much.

Cantor! There’s always Cantor!

441 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:56:06pm

re: #437 Buck

Because someone posted a GOP leader who is an antisemite, AND someone else thought that it would explain why jews don’t vote for Republicans. So I pointed out that there are democratic anti semites, and (hard to imagine) two really good examples are not good enough.

If they run Jimmy Carter for office again, I’ll vote Republican.

Seems highly unlikely.

442 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:56:14pm

re: #436 Obdicut

Not really. He’s not a Democratic leader. Hasn’t been for a dog’s age.

The current Democratic party has a bunch of Jewish representatives and senators. The GOP, not so much.

Some think that Carters endorsement of Obama is what finally turned the corner for him during the democratic leadership campaign.

443 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:56:22pm

re: #434 Dark_Falcon

Cater is still active and still getting books published, so that example does have some validity.

let’s see what doesn’t he have


thinking…


thinking…

thinking…

thinking…

OH YEAH ELECTED OFFICE LOL.

444 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:56:32pm

re: #435 researchok

That’s where i have to disagree.

There is plenty to be critical of Israel. Plenty.

That said, the Palestinians embrace and endorse state sponsored racism, bigotry, hate and calls to genocide. School curricula, media and even state funded religious preachers spew some of the most bigotry you can imagine.

I can understand an anti Israel stance. I have no problem with that (I am critical of many of Israel’s positions). That said, a pro Palestinian position is a tacit acceptance of racism and bigotry

The two-state solution means dealing with and in some cases finding people among them to support. Disheartening as it may be for many.

445 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:57:45pm

re: #441 SanFranciscoZionist

If they run Jimmy Carter for office again, I’ll vote Republican.

Seems highly unlikely.

well, he’s so young and spry and relevant to the party! Everyone’s always talking about how much awesome titanic cosmic power Carter wields!

oh wait, that’s not everyone, that’s just conservatives here on LGF who have wandered into the Magical Balance Fairy’s Unseelie Court :D

446 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:58:45pm

re: #442 Buck

Some think that Carters endorsement of Obama is what finally turned the corner for him during the democratic leadership campaign.

Really? Who thinks that, and what evidence have they got? I didn’t even know Carter had endorsed anyone. (Granted, I was a hardcore Hillary girl.)

447 Wozza Matter?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:59:08pm

g’night.

448 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:59:26pm

re: #444 wozzablog

The two-state solution means dealing with and in some cases finding people among them to support. Disheartening as it may be for many.

No argument here.

The two state solution is the only workable solution.

Israel cannot forever keep occupying a dysfunctional society without having to pay a huge cost.

449 bratwurst  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:59:40pm

re: #442 Buck

Some think that Carters endorsement of Obama is what finally turned the corner for him during the democratic leadership campaign.

“Some” in this case being you and the frog in your pocket.

450 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 6:59:44pm

re: #442 Buck

Some think that Carters endorsement of Obama is what finally turned the corner for him during the democratic leadership campaign.


we love you SO much uncle buck

will you tell us a bedtime story

451 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:00:27pm

re: #449 bratwurst

“Some” in this case being you and the frog in your pocket.

Case #1 on why he “hates” President Obama.

blech

452 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:02:08pm

re: #448 researchok

No argument here.

The two state solution is the only workable solution.

Israel cannot forever keep occupying a dysfunctional society without having to pay a huge cost.

Among the hard-core anti-Israel crowd, the two-state solution has essentially been dismissed, unfortunately.

(And just after they finally sold it to me! Damnit! It’s like how the right always doesn’t agree with me about Ariel Sharon, no matter what!)

453 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:04:06pm

re: #206 Killgore Trout

I haven’t been following the story so I’ll leave this one to you. Give it a skim and check some facts before posting it. Reason is not the most reliable source.

There is a photo of Assange with the well-known Holocaust denier peeking over his shoulder.

Maybe it’s Photoshopped by Zionists who want to discredit Assange or “Shamir” or both of them.
/

454 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:04:35pm

re: #452 SanFranciscoZionist

Among the hard-core anti-Israel crowd, the two-state solution has essentially been dismissed, unfortunately.

(And just after they finally sold it to me! Damnit! It’s like how the right always doesn’t agree with me about Ariel Sharon, no matter what!)

That hard core crowd wants to see Israel washed away, one way or teh other.

Think about it- they are endorsing a one state solution when group has publicly promised to eradicate the other- and they expect to be taken seriously.

455 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:05:05pm

re: #453 Alouette

There is a photo of Assange with the well-known Holocaust denier peeking over his shoulder.

Maybe it’s Photoshopped by Zionists who want to discredit Assange or “Shamir” or both of them.
/

I think I saw a shadow of a shark in the background.

456 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:05:19pm

re: #442 Buck

Some think that Carters endorsement of Obama is what finally turned the corner for him during the democratic leadership campaign.

Really?
Excuse me for a moment…

HA! HA! HA! HA1 HA! HA! HA! HA!!!

Meanwhile, back in the real world, try to come up with an example of Carter’s influence that passes the laugh test.

457 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:06:18pm

re: #456 Dark_Falcon

Really?
Excuse me for a moment…

HA! HA! HA! HA1 HA! HA! HA! HA!!!

Meanwhile, back in the real world, try to come up with an example of Carter’s influence that passes the laugh test.

Well, he swings a mean hammer.

And he saw a UFO.

458 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:08:29pm

re: #457 researchok

Well, he swings a mean hammer.

And he saw a UFO.

Yeah, but he got punked by a rabbit.

459 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:09:18pm

re: #452 SanFranciscoZionist

Among the hard-core anti-Israel crowd, the two-state solution has essentially been dismissed, unfortunately.

(And just after they finally sold it to me! Damnit! It’s like how the right always doesn’t agree with me about Ariel Sharon, no matter what!)

I have a feeling we’ll be old people and this will still be unsolved :(

460 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:10:37pm

re: #453 Alouette

There is a photo of Assange with the well-known Holocaust denier peeking over his shoulder.

Maybe it’s Photoshopped by Zionists who want to discredit Assange or “Shamir” or both of them.
/

oh man, you’re kidding me, the weirdo with the website that crackpots and conspiracy theorists adore is associating with freaks?


next you’ll tell me that rock stars know drug dealers

461 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:14:23pm

re: #449 bratwurst

“Some” in this case being you and the frog in your pocket.

He is a super delegate, and Hillary was hoping for the support of the super delegates at the end.

But denial is strong in this group.

462 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:17:16pm

re: #461 Buck

He is a super delegate, and Hillary was hoping for the support of the super delegates at the end.

But denial is strong in this group.

We are all antisemites in your mind.

It really fucks up your purpose, but you haven’t realized that yet have you?

463 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:17:39pm

re: #460 WindUpBird

oh man, you’re kidding me, the weirdo with the website that crackpots and conspiracy theorists adore is associating with freaks?

next you’ll tell me that rock stars know drug dealers

Oh that is going to hurt when you see the next thread….

464 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:18:18pm

re: #462 Stanley Sea

We are all antisemites in your mind.

It really fucks up your purpose, but you haven’t realized that yet have you?

Not at all true, but thanks for the smear.

465 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:19:11pm

re: #461 Buck

Can you or can you not give a current example of a Democratic leader who is as antisemitic as the GOP member cited?

466 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:19:43pm

re: #464 Buck

Not at all true, but thanks for the smear.

I’ve read your posts for a l o n g t i m e

I’m clear, no smear.

467 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:19:52pm

re: #463 Buck

Why would that hurt?

Some days, I doubt your ability to comprehend any level of nuance whatsoever.

468 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:20:55pm

re: #461 Buck

Buck, let it go. All you’re going to get pursuing this is more downdings.

469 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:20:58pm

re: #466 Stanley Sea

I’ve read your posts for a l o n g t i m e

I’m clear, no smear.

And you can find me calling everyone here an antisemite?

I don’t know who you are reading, but based on that comment, I doubt it is me.

470 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:21:30pm

re: #461 Buck

He is a super delegate, and Hillary was hoping for the support of the super delegates at the end.

But denial is strong in this group.

Bill Clinton was also a super-delegate. Why didn’t he cancel Carter out?

471 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:22:30pm

re: #470 SanFranciscoZionist

Bill Clinton was also a super-delegate. Why didn’t he cancel Carter out?

Actually, it was said that Carter cancelled Clinton out… And Hillary was counting on Clinton…

472 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:25:57pm

re: #471 Buck

Actually, it was said that Carter cancelled Clinton out… And Hillary was counting on Clinton…

thank you uncle buck!

473 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:26:05pm

re: #471 Buck

You know each superdelegate gets only one vote, right?

Carter was not the deciding factor in the 2008 election. That is ridiculous beyond belief. Absolutely fatuous. Has no basis in reality.

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

474 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:26:18pm

re: #467 Obdicut

Why would that hurt?

Some days, I doubt your ability to comprehend any level of nuance whatsoever.

ahahahahahahahahaha

475 Stanley Sea  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:27:17pm

re: #473 Obdicut

You know each superdelegate gets only one vote, right?

Carter was not the deciding factor in the 2008 election. That is ridiculous beyond belief. Absolutely fatuous. Has no basis in reality.

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

GAH

476 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:28:41pm

re: #471 Buck

Actually, it was said that Carter cancelled Clinton out… And Hillary was counting on Clinton…

They’re from different states, and Obama won an easy majority of the superdelegates. I’ll repeat, do you have some actual source that says Carter’s influence was…influential?

477 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:28:46pm

re: #463 Buck

Oh that is going to hurt when you see the next thread…

hurt? I expect it, dude! I am not surprised one bit! he’s in the realm of crackpots, the crackpots are part of his machinery. I actually KNOW crackpots. My eyes are wide open. :)

It’s like you’re operating by reading every fifth word we write, and then attempting to piece together something from that. Your understanding is through some bizarre noise filter that works in reverse, it adds noise and gibberish which you then seem to operate from. A nest, created from untruths, half truths, and bizarre suspicions.

478 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:29:03pm

re: #475 Stanley Sea

GAH

Shhh! UNCLE BUCK IS TELLING US A STORY!!!!!

:D

479 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:31:42pm

re: #473 Obdicut

You know each superdelegate gets only one vote, right?

Carter was not the deciding factor in the 2008 election. That is ridiculous beyond belief. Absolutely fatuous. Has no basis in reality.

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

I never said he was the deciding factor.

480 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:32:07pm

re: #473 Obdicut

You know each superdelegate gets only one vote, right?

Carter was not the deciding factor in the 2008 election. That is ridiculous beyond belief. Absolutely fatuous. Has no basis in reality.

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

DING! DING! DING!
Buck is back!

481 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:32:54pm

re: #479 Buck

I never said he was the deciding factor.

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

482 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:34:10pm

re: #404 SanFranciscoZionist

She’s the one who is married to the very beautiful Pakistani guy, right?

Was married to. re: #461 Buck

He is a super delegate, and Hillary was hoping for the support of the super delegates at the end.

But denial is strong in this group.

OMG! Super Delegate. Happy 1990’s everybody.

483 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:35:36pm

re: #479 Buck

I never said he was the deciding factor.

Your #442 states: Some think that Carters endorsement of Obama is what finally turned the corner for him during the democratic leadership campaign.

So far you have not been able to back this up in the slightest. I do not say it is impossible. Simply that you need to have some sort of proof, especially since you put it forward as evidence that Carter was still a person of significant influence in the Democratic party.

Got any more anti-Semites?

484 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:44:24pm

re: #483 SanFranciscoZionist

Simply that you need to have some sort of proof, especially since you put it forward as evidence that Carter was still a person of significant influence in the Democratic party.

It was the discussions between Carter and Gore to create a single message for Hillary that she had to step down “for the good of the Democrats.”

A majority of the super delegates would go with them if they did.

I remember it well. I was a supporter of Hillary as well. A close friend of mine worked very closely with the Clintons during that time, and still travels with Bill often.

485 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:44:51pm

OK I spent the last 2 hours in French language forums dealing with this particular journalist.
The redacting of her name seems rather pointless for most since everyone in Algeria seems to be familiar with her name.
Nobody seems to assume that she is in any danger, just a bit embarrassed. She didn’t tell the Americans anything that wasn’t common knowledge.
Btw the cable is classified Confidential only. And the ONLY published cable from Algiers not classified Secret.
You’d think that the embassy in Algiers should have protected her a little better.
Yes WL (and whoever vetted the cable) should have redacted her name and that of her paper. But her name has been out for 2 weeks in Algeria now and I can’t find a single person voicing concern for her safety, and they do have lively discussions.

486 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:46:58pm

Fine, you wont accept them, and I am sure you will find reasons to excuse them, but:

Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, and Maxine Waters.

487 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:46:59pm

re: #484 Buck

It was the discussions between Carter and Gore to create a single message for Hillary that she had to step down “for the good of the Democrats.”

A majority of the super delegates would go with them if they did.

I remember it well. I was a supporter of Hillary as well. A close friend of mine worked very closely with the Clintons during that time, and still travels with Bill often.

OK, that’s a whole different issue, and that didn’t come out of Jimmy Carter’s head.

488 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:47:06pm

To quote Charles

But what do the little people matter when you’re changing the world?

That is exactly my opinion at this point in time of Julian Assange.
(Just don’t tell him he’s really one of the “little people”, until you wnt to watch his head explode!)

489 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:48:01pm

re: #487 SanFranciscoZionist

OK, that’s a whole different issue, and that didn’t come out of Jimmy Carter’s head.

He was influential and Gore would not stand there by himself… he needed another elder to stand with him.

490 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:49:15pm

re: #486 Buck

Maxine Waters?
BWAHAHAHA.

491 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:51:04pm

re: #486 Buck

Kucinich is anti-Israel in many ways, but has never, to my knowledge, said anything actually antisemetic.

Here’s a speech by Barbara Lee:


Ms. LEE. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding and for your patience and for your understanding and for your really very skillful way in bringing us all together to make sure that there is a resolution that we all can support.

I do support H. Res. 1361, putting the House, first of all, on record in support of the United States leading a high-level diplomatic effort to ensure that the Durban Review Conference, better known as Durban II, serves as a forum to review commitments to combat all forms of racism.

The resolution also directs the United States to strongly oppose any effort by any party to use the forum as a platform for attacking Israel, for promoting anti-Semitism, or undermining the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

…

So let me just say it has been a privilege working with all of you over these past several months in crafting this language that reflects our shared commitment to combating racism in all forms and condemning anti-Semitism.

What the fuck are you talking about?

492 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:51:31pm

re: #486 Buck

Fine, you wont accept them, and I am sure you will find reasons to excuse them, but:

Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, and Maxine Waters.

Lee and Kucinich have pissed me off about Israel and the Middle East on various occasions. Waters, nothing is springing to mind, but I don’t know much about her. What have they said that you would define as anti-Semitic?

493 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:52:02pm

re: #489 Buck

He was influential and Gore would not stand there by himself… he needed another elder to stand with him.

Sure. But this is a long way from Carter the kingmaker.

494 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:53:26pm

re: #492 SanFranciscoZionist

Is there something about Lee that I’m not getting?

This is some pretty subtle anti-semitism.

495 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:58:24pm

re: #494 Obdicut

Is there something about Lee that I’m not getting?

This is some pretty subtle anti-semitism.

She signed a letter demanding the US look into the flotilla disaster, and has often expressed concern about Gaza, pressing for the blockade to be lifted. I disagree with her—profoundly—but I do not have reason to think she is an anti-Semite.

496 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:59:35pm

re: #495 SanFranciscoZionist

Ah, okay. Yeah, to me, that entire class of ‘Israel is beating up on the poor Palestinians’ bullshit isn’t antisemitic on its own. It’s just a really stupid misunderstanding of the situation. If anything, it’s racist towards the Arabs, like, “They just can’t help themselves”.

497 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:09:54pm

re: #496 Obdicut

Ah, okay. Yeah, to me, that entire class of ‘Israel is beating up on the poor Palestinians’ bullshit isn’t antisemitic on its own. It’s just a really stupid misunderstanding of the situation. If anything, it’s racist towards the Arabs, like, “They just can’t help themselves”.

It’s dangerous, and stupid, and I’m not excusing it. But there’s a long way between ‘oh, poor Gaza’, and ‘if you’re a Jew you’re not the best choice for public office’.

498 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:21:00pm

re: #495 SanFranciscoZionist

She signed a letter demanding the US look into the flotilla disaster, and has often expressed concern about Gaza, pressing for the blockade to be lifted. I disagree with her—profoundly—but I do not have reason to think she is an anti-Semite.

Concur.

499 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:26:54pm

re: #493 SanFranciscoZionist

Sure. But this is a long way from Carter the kingmaker.

I didn’t say kingmaker exactly, we were discussing how influential he still was in the Democratic party. However we agree that he is an anti semite, so it is interesting that Michael Moore’s latest flop praises former president Jimmy Carter. AND then Michael Moore gets tied into JA.

500 Dark_Falcon  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:27:38pm

Going upstairs…

501 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:30:15pm

re: #499 Buck

I didn’t say kingmaker exactly, we were discussing how influential he still was in the Democratic party. However we agree that he is an anti semite, so it is interesting that Michael Moore’s latest flop praises former president Jimmy Carter. AND then Michael Moore gets tied into JA.

Actually, Assange bores the hell out of me, as does Moore, so I can’t say ‘interesting’.

502 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:33:24pm

re: #499 Buck

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

503 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:41:12pm

re: #485 Mark Winter

OK I spent the last 2 hours in French language forums dealing with this particular journalist.
The redacting of her name seems rather pointless for most since everyone in Algeria seems to be familiar with her name.
Nobody seems to assume that she is in any danger, just a bit embarrassed. She didn’t tell the Americans anything that wasn’t common knowledge.
Btw the cable is classified Confidential only. And the ONLY published cable from Algiers not classified Secret.
You’d think that the embassy in Algiers should have protected her a little better.
Yes WL (and whoever vetted the cable) should have redacted her name and that of her paper. But her name has been out for 2 weeks in Algeria now and I can’t find a single person voicing concern for her safety, and they do have lively discussions.

Really. So you come here to share your knowledge that there’s absolutely no problem with this, but can’t even post a link to support it. We should all just take your word that this is nothing to worry about.

504 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 8:55:56pm

re: #502 Obdicut

Now, can you actually cite a current Democratic leader who’s as antisemetic as the GOP member cited? Or would you like to continue dodging and weaseling?

Look you set the time limit. But I don’t think it is relevant that there is an antisemite that rises to YOUR level of evidence… but only currently.

The discussion is why the jews vote Democrat. I think it is going to change, BUT…. jews seem to ignore and excuse the antisemites of even recent past.

the Rev. Al Sharpton - on going
Cynthia McKinney - it was only 2002 Dude… not ancient history
Earl Hilliard , again in 2002
Jesse Jackson - ongoing
James Moran - “the leaders of the Jewish community” sent the country to war in Iraq,
Ernest Hollings - Bush had sent the country to war “in order to win Jewish votes.”

Now do not tell me there are also GOP anti semites…. my point is that there are in both parties….

Good night

505 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 9:52:21pm

re: #503 Charles

Really. So you come here to share your knowledge that there’s absolutely no problem with this, but can’t even post a link to support it. We should all just take your word that this is nothing to worry about.

All the links prominently feature her name. Do you want to advertise it?
I have not said that there is no problem with it, only that the Algerian and French posters seem not to see one (yet).

You say that WL “isn’t concerned about the little people”? They have been x-ing out names all the time. Obviously they didn’t realize that cables marked as “confidential” could be that sensitive but they immediately headed the first request to anonymize (too late, unfortunately).

Robert Novak didn’t afford the same courtesy to Valerie Plame. And that was TOP SECRET info, and remained top secret even after the outing.

At least the CIA thought so. I don’t remember the Espionage Act of 1917 considered back then.

I understand that you, as an American, will see Cablegate in a somewhat different light as a European will. If we were talking about German or French cables, most Americans would just yawn.

But I will make the case that every foreign intelligence service worth its salt has access to info available to 2.5 million Americans.

Classified info in the wrong hands is actually more dangerous than classified info that everyone can read.

And if almost a million have access to top secret info, well…

506 Charles Johnson  Wed, Dec 15, 2010 10:58:51am

re: #505 Mark Winter

Oh, well then, there’s nothing to worry about, is there, if posters on blogs say there’s no problem?

I note that your response to this is to throw out a whole bunch of confusing nonsense that has nothing to do with the point — and the point is that Wikileaks supporters do not seem to give one shit about the human lives that are being screwed with. You’ve reinforced that point very well.

507 Mark Winter  Wed, Dec 15, 2010 11:37:00am

re: #506 Charles

and the point is that Wikileaks supporters do not seem to give one shit about the human lives that are being screwed with. You’ve reinforced that point very well.

Wow

508 Charles Johnson  Wed, Dec 15, 2010 4:44:49pm

re: #507 Mark Winter

Wow

No … “wow” is finding out that the Russian representative for Wikileaks is a notorious Holocaust denier and raving, deranged antisemite. Now, that’s a “wow.”

509 Mark Winter  Wed, Dec 15, 2010 5:44:21pm

re: #508 Charles

No … “wow” is finding out that the Russian representative for Wikileaks is a notorious Holocaust denier and raving, deranged antisemite. Now, that’s a “wow.”

Something I strongly condemn. I am not an uncritical supporter of WL. But their Advisory Board also has Chinese dissidents, for example.

If there is one thing you should really worry about, it’s the revival of the nefarious Espionage Act of 1917 in order to prosecute Assange and WL, or the current proposals of Lieberman.

The U.S. government will then be able to prosecute anyone who publishes, republishes or just talks and writes about something that the government has classified.

That will be interesting to watch when a future Republican President orders scientific results he doesn’t like to be classified. Maybe about AGW.

In that case the First Amendment won’t be worth the paper it’s written on. And every authoritarian state in the world will be enthusiastic because the U.S. is giving away every argument against the suppression of free media.

Yes WL needs to do a better job to protect innocent people. But to say that they don’t give one shit about human lives is a rather broad brush you are using here.

I wouldn’t miss Assange, and certainly not Shamir.

510 Charles Johnson  Wed, Dec 15, 2010 7:20:35pm

re: #509 Mark Winter

Got it. I should be worried about a possible revival of the Espionage Act and the First Amendment rights of people who steal classified documents, and I should stop being so concerned about this Algerian peasant.

511 Mark Winter  Wed, Dec 15, 2010 8:49:03pm

re: #510 Charles

Got it. I should be worried about a possible revival of the Espionage Act and the First Amendment rights of people who steal classified documents, and I should stop being so concerned about this Algerian peasant.

I am REALLY trying to argue in good faith here but frankly, I’m a bit worked up.

1) WL has headed the request to anonymize the name of the Algerian journalist on request of Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). Which is the only one up to now who seem to believe that the journalist is in danger. I have digged through Algerian/French discussion sites to find out what the Algerians are thinking, and I simply can’t find anyone who has the same concern (Links in private on request because I DO respect her name not be exposed here). Most comments say that the journalist case is actually “anodin” (trivial). Her own newspaper btw puts out a variety of articles in favor of WL. Every newspaper in Algeria has quoted the cable with her name. Obviously her colleagues didn’t think it to be a problem. If it turns out to be one, WL would have made a mistake, but certainly not in bad faith. They probably simply didn’t think that a cable with such a low classification would cause problems to a person and the vetting papers didn’t note the problem either.

2) Assange/WL didn’t “steal” any documents, they published them. You could as well say that the NYT or The Guardian “stole” the documents or anyone who quotes them. Everyone who has ever published classified documents in the U.S. or spoken about them has rightly been claiming 1st Amendment rights - up to now. The media would be a poor show if they could only work with “official” stuff the government chooses to give them. The media is not the mouthpiece of the government, but its controller.

3) Assange is not even a U.S. citizen. He’s not bound by any law to respect U.S. classification rules (or Russian, Chinese, French for that matter). He might not want to visit the U.S. in the near future but that’s about it. You - or rather the U.S. - blame a foreigner who is not in the U.S. for breaking U.S. law but you need a Grand Jury to find out what obscure law this might be? You think about demanding the extradition of a foreigner who you say has broken a U.S. law but can’t really say which one (yet)? Because this foreigner or rather the organization he heads exposed - for example - that the U.S. government pressured Germany to drop extradition requests for CIA operatives known by their true names who committed a crime against a German citizen that is punishable in U.S. and German jurisdiction? What kind of legal standards are these? Ignore the crime and prosecute the guy who talks about it? This is not the United States I have known.

3) The U.S. government has learned about the fact that WL had the cables FIVE MONTHS AGO. In those 5 months it hasn’t been able to stop the publishing by any legal means (nor the NYT which is a U.S. newspaper). Maybe Lieberman can come up with a new one, but never mind ex post facto. His proposals - and the revival of the Espionage Act of 1917, which has been abused various times by Woodrow Wilson - are a clear and present danger to YOUR freedom. It means that YOUR government will decide what you are allowed to know and what not. Whistle blowing is necessary, publishing things which may be classified but are in the public’s interest is very necessary.

I agree that this comes with responsibility, and it’s possible that WL needs to learn more about it.

So whatever you reply to this post, please don’t say that I don’t care about the Algerian journalist, because I do. I spent 5 hours in order to find out in what danger she might be. And if you want to know what she’s thinking, I’m willing to translate your questions into French and mail them to her. Or you can do that yourself and I’ll tell you how you can do that.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 61 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 163 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1