Wikileaks, how do you feel about this? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Zyber · 11-28-2010, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cash4Me

I wonder why wikileaks releases all that huge data and doesn't release the real sources where data came from.

Maybe they don't want the source to be sent to Guantanamo for some water-boarding and rock music?

Vendzilla · 11-28-2010, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterPeabody

Well, forums are made for "quick judgements", aren't they? LOL If you feel that way, being against war and such, then I apologize for my comments. Lumping every ex-Military man in with all the gung-ho kill freaks this current Armed Forces seem to attract is always a bad thing, so again: apologies.

Having said the above - uh oh - half my family is Military. My dad was a Marine, four Uncles were also, etc etc. I have family in both Iraq and Asshat-istan. So I do see both sides, and here's what I know Vendzilla:

True, I don't want nations, rogue or otherwise, having the capacity to destroy using our stolen/traded for technology. Being a realist, while I wish THIS country (USA) didn't have such capabilities either I understand the horse has left the barn, or whatever. So we're stuck in this crazed world, where every country is shuffling their chess pieces, rattling their sabers, keeping the Military Industrial Complexes alive and kicking while....keeping their made-up wars in far-off little forgotten corners of the Globe. Better to make profit that way while keeping the populations of the civilized world busy/distracted with their little greed games.

It ALL sucks V.

</rant>

My clearance was very high, I was part of the weapons department on a nuclear fast attack submarine. We had enough firepower to wipe out most countries fleet with one attack. When the stakes are that high, it's that serious. The technology we had access to for the time was state of the art. The USSR had 3 times the submarines we had, but their technology was decades behind us, it was that technology race that ended the USSR because they couldn't afford to keep up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendorous_Male

Soldiers die because your government sent them there, not because wikileaks.

So your telling me that wikileaks has the OK from you to put our troops in danger?

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeloubani

It's a tough thing man because it's a fragile balance between the right to be informed what the government we appoint is doing and the duty that that government has to protect us and therefore keep some information private. And I would be on your side 100% if it was a United States that wasn't at war right now or if it was a United States that people truly felt was being run honestly and transparently. But the way things are now with the corruption, foreign political influences on national political policies and the war that was just started on false pretenses, people need to say that the government has overstepped their bounds and has become out of the people's control, and they need to know exactly why their country is in the situation it is in. If it means there are people's lives put in danger so be it - I'd rather a soldier's life be in danger that is fighting for my freedom over a soldier somewhere enforcing a policy that doesn't benefit me in any way while I'm at home clueless funding the operation.

But who would make that call? It's simple, secret is dealt with as secret, period

MaDalton · 11-28-2010, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

But who would make that call? It's simple, secret is dealt with as secret, period

Quote:

Gut die Hälfte der jetzt bekannt gewordenen Botschaftskabel unterliegt keiner Geheimhaltungsstufe, etwas weniger, 40,5 Prozent, sind als "vertraulich" eingeordnet. Sechs Prozent der Dokumente, 15.652 Depeschen, tragen den Vermerk "geheim", 4330 davon sind so brisant, dass sie als "Noforn" ausgewiesen sind, also Ausländern nicht zugänglich gemacht werden dürfen.

=

Quote:

Just over half of the announced would Embassy cable is not subject to classification, a little less, 40.5 percent are classified as "confidential". Six percent of the documents, 15 652 dispatches bear the words "secret", of which 4330 are so explosive that they are designated as "Noforn", that foreigners should not be made available.

most of the stuff is gossip (like which wife of which politician had too many plastic surgeries) - so stop whining

but it shows nicely for what reasons the US sends ambassadors - to collect gossip. and it also shows nicely what the US government thinks about others. and btw - the docs are mostly from the Bush times.

BittieBucks Eric · 11-28-2010, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nico-t

what the fuck... you need a brain check dude. The more open a government is, the better. Id say release every fucking thing thats top secret, but they wont because the stupid sheep would be in awe how they are being fucked by their own government. The average joe cannot handle the truth, or just decides he wont believe it. Like a good little tax paying sheep.

craftyc · 11-28-2010, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oracle Porn

Can someone explain how a site like wikileaks can host in the states and nothing is done about it?

Its hosted in ireland

Agent 488 · 11-28-2010, 05:09 PM

http://thenextweb.com/eu/2010/08/30/...uclear-bunker/

Wikileaks now hosted from an underground nuclear bunker

Agent 488 · 11-28-2010, 05:10 PM

WikiLeaks describes itself as “an uncensorable system for untraceable mass document leaking”. WikiLeaks is hosted by PRQ, a Sweden-based company providing “highly secure, no-questions-asked hosting services.” PRQ is said to have “almost no information about its clientele and maintains few if any of its own logs.” The servers are spread around the world with the central server located in Sweden.[54] Julian Assange has said that the servers are located in Sweden (and the other countries) "specifically because those nations offer legal protection to the disclosures made on the site". He talks about the Swedish constitution, which gives the information providers total legal protection.[54] It is forbidden according to Swedish law for any administrative authority to make inquiries about the sources of any type of newspaper.[55] These laws, and the hosting by PRQ, make it difficult to take WikiLeaks offline. Furthermore, "Wikileaks maintains its own servers at undisclosed locations, keeps no logs and uses military-grade encryption to protect sources and other confidential information." Such arrangements have been called "bulletproof hosting."[56][57]
On 17 August 2010, it was announced that the Swedish Pirate Party will be hosting and managing many of WikiLeaks' new servers. The party donates servers and bandwidth to WikiLeaks without charge. Technicians of the party will make sure that the servers are maintained and working.[58][59] Some servers are hosted in underground cold war era nuclear shelters. The physical security layer is 30m White Mountains solid bedrock.[60]
WikiLeaks is based on several software packages, including MediaWiki, Freenet, Tor, and PGP.[61] WikiLeaks strongly encouraged postings via Tor due to the strong privacy needs of its users.[62]

craftyc · 11-28-2010, 05:13 PM

I think more business gets done on wikileaks than on this forum!

Cash4Me · 11-28-2010, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zyber

Maybe they don't want the source to be sent to Guantanamo for some water-boarding and rock music?

and so wikileaks is worthless

epitome · 11-28-2010, 05:18 PM

Hey Vend, were you in the Navy and did you have a clearance? You never make that clear in your threads.

rogueteens · 11-28-2010, 05:36 PM

The leaked US embassy cables, published on the Wikileaks site and at length in newspapers including the New York Times and the UK's Guardian, also reportedly include accounts of:

Bargaining to empty the Guantanamo Bay prison camp - including Slovenian diplomats being told to take in a freed prisoner if they wanted to secure a meeting with President Barack Obama
Germany being warned in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for US Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in an operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was abducted and held in Afghanistan
US officials being instructed to spy on the UN's leadership by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
The very close relationship between Russian PM Vladimir Putin and his Italian counterpart Silvio Berlusconi
Alleged links between the Russian government and organised crime
Yemen's president talking to then US Mid-East commander General David Petraeus about attacks on Yemeni al-Qaeda bases and saying: "We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours"
Faltering US attempts to prevent Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon

Not exactly military secrets is it, more like just embarrasing revelations.

moeloubani · 11-28-2010, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

But who would make that call? It's simple, secret is dealt with as secret, period

But then you have governments involved in drug trafficking, assassinations and starting wars without the interest of the people they serve. How do they people know who is at fault if everything is always secret?

What's the point of fighting for freedom if you're not fighting for freedom at all? Do you believe that people should just follow what the government tells them to do without questioning it? What if the government keeps saying 'sorry that's secret' then the people should just move on to other questions? How can you have so much faith in the government, it seems like you're better suited for a socialist government??

MaDalton · 11-28-2010, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeloubani

But then you have governments involved in drug trafficking, assassinations and starting wars without the interest of the people they serve. How do they people know who is at fault if everything is always secret?

What's the point of fighting for freedom if you're not fighting for freedom at all? Do you believe that people should just follow what the government tells them to do without questioning it? What if the government keeps saying 'sorry that's secret' then the people should just move on to other questions? How can you have so much faith in the government, it seems like you're better suited for a socialist government??

you just opened a can of worms..

Kiopa_Matt · 11-28-2010, 05:50 PM

I think it's excellent. A more informed populous = a better country / world.

mynameisjim · 11-28-2010, 05:56 PM

This has caused a dilemma for Fox news as well. I was watching yesterday and they had a story about the counterfeit domains being seized by ICE, which they spun as more government takeovers and control.

Then they ran a story about wikileaks, and the guests and host all bashed Obama for not using his new cyberlaw power to take down the wikileaks site.

Can't have it both ways.

D Ghost · 11-28-2010, 06:26 PM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40405218...ew_york_times/

mgtarheels · 11-28-2010, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

You mean like how to make a nuclear weapon?

A kid pre high school figured out how to make a nuclear bomb.

Not exactly overly difficult information to find and compile.

mgtarheels · 11-28-2010, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

So your telling me that wikileaks has the OK from you to put our troops in danger?

You simpleton, that isn't even close to what he said.

Wikileaks did not put the troops in harm's way.

The government and the troops themselves put themselves in harm's way.

Last time I checked, Wikileaks didn't deploy any convoys to the middle east.

theking · 11-28-2010, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

OK, I have a problem with this, when I had a clearance in the Navy, I was careful about everything. I was told the story about what happened in WWII when a government official in a speech said the cruising depth of the submarines was 400ft and then the enemy set their depth charges to 400 ft and we lost a bunch of submarines because of it.

Now we have some asshole thats going to release a bunch of Top Secret Info and what's our government doing about it?

Too bad we have a spineless president, Reagan would have someone put a bullet in the back of his head, but our present administration is trying to talk him into not releasing this?

I don't like it...but on the other hand I cannot help but think that there is info/mis-info in the leaks that...what ever their reasons...the government wanted leaked...or they would have already stopped this from happening.

Vendzilla · 11-28-2010, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

You simpleton, that isn't even close to what he said.

Wikileaks did not put the troops in harm's way.

The government and the troops themselves put themselves in harm's way.

Last time I checked, Wikileaks didn't deploy any convoys to the middle east.

Hey shit for brains, I know what he said. And the answer stands, try using a fucking brain cell.
They are putting out secret documents, I'll make you a deal, if one person gets hurt over it, can I kick you in the balls with steel toe boots?
If you answer no, then you are not sure of your answer , just another shit for brains

mgtarheels · 11-28-2010, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Hey shit for brains, I know what he said. And the answer stands, try using a fucking brain cell.
They are putting out secret documents, I'll make you a deal, if one person gets hurt over it, can I kick you in the balls with steel toe boots?
If you answer no, then you are not sure of your answer , just another shit for brains

What the fuck does this have to do with anything and how is Wiki putting troops in danger? You still have yet to answer this.

Vendzilla · 11-28-2010, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I don't like it...but on the other hand I cannot help but think that there is info/mis-info in the leaks that...what ever their reasons...the government wanted leaked...or they would have already stopped this from happening.

Or our president has no balls
Mass leaks like this look bad for all on this, loses respect, they have already lost a lot of that.

If it were just one thing, that I could accept, but so far, nothing has stuck out

Thing is again, it's not about what harm it does, who is to know, but secrets revealed can get our troops killed so no secrets revealed is better.

Kinda like the security of dinner at the white house, even they get crashed

Agent 488 · 11-28-2010, 07:16 PM

how many soldiers killed by wikileaks so far - zero.

mgtarheels · 11-28-2010, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agent 488

how many soldiers killed by wikileaks so far - zero.

secrets get our troops killed! Wikileaks is killing our troops!

Kiopa_Matt · 11-28-2010, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Or our president has no balls

Yes, the good ole' days of "bring 'em on!" sure worked out well for everyone.

theking · 11-28-2010, 07:26 PM

[QUOTE=Kiopa_Matt;17734047]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Or our president has no balls/QUOTE]

Yes, the good ole' days of "bring 'em on!" sure worked out well for everyone.

Well...that policy has sent tens of thousands of Muslims to see their maker...now hasn't it. The U.S. military has a kill ration of 10-1 to 100-1 and sometimes higher.

MaDalton · 11-28-2010, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Or our president has no balls
Mass leaks like this look bad for all on this, loses respect, they have already lost a lot of that.

If it were just one thing, that I could accept, but so far, nothing has stuck out

Thing is again, it's not about what harm it does, who is to know, but secrets revealed can get our troops killed so no secrets revealed is better.

Kinda like the security of dinner at the white house, even they get crashed

you got that wrong - the world lost respect because of people like you who defend a position that has no backup - besides by a few nutcases that no one took seriously anyways. you have no idea how ridiculus your opinions look like from the point of view of the rest of the world.

Cyber Fucker · 11-28-2010, 07:26 PM

To tell the truth I don't know if it's all good or bad, I'm more towards "the more info about dirty things our politicians do the better" I can already see how evil and dirty are our governments. From the other hand the more peace around the world the better, I'm not sure what future consequences of this might be, this would require long, detailed and wide analysis.

Splendorous_Male · 11-28-2010, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

So your telling me that wikileaks has the OK from you to put our troops in danger?

Yes, because its them who sent the troops to war not the president that YOU voted for.

Splendorous_Male · 11-28-2010, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

The technology we had access to for the time was state of the art. The USSR had 3 times the submarines we had, but their technology was decades behind us, it was that technology race that ended the USSR because they couldn't afford to keep up.

Sounds like load of crap to me.

"US officials recently acknowledged for the first time that US submarines could not readily locate an Akula submarine operating off the coast of the USA. "It is difficult to find the most advanced Russian Akula class submarines when they operate at tactical speed or less," Admiral Jeremy Boorda said. Other military experts sounded the alarm as early as 1988. Anthony Batista, senior staff member of the Armed Forces Committee declared, "The Akula is the best submarine in the world today." A recent report from the Office of Naval Intelligence noted that the improved Akula submarines could indeed surpass the quieting of the Los Angeles class at tactical speeds. On August 9, 1995, during a lobbying effort on behalf of the Seawolf and the following Virginia class submarines, retired Vice Admiral E.A. Burkhalter announced that the $7 billion-per-year Russian program had produced "the Akula submarine, which is quieter than Seawolf." In an effort to raise public awareness, Martin Marietta, a leading defense contractor, ran ads featuring the Akula class in a number of newspapers including the San Diego Union-Tribune. While it may be difficult to separate the hype military supporters chronically use to "talk up a potential threat, in order to justify their own building programs" from the actual capabilities obscured by Russian secrecy, one impression remains: America can no longer claim uncontested dominance of the oceanic strata."

Rangermoore · 11-28-2010, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

OK, I have a problem with this, when I had a clearance in the Navy, I was careful about everything. I was told the story about what happened in WWII when a government official in a speech said the cruising depth of the submarines was 400ft and then the enemy set their depth charges to 400 ft and we lost a bunch of submarines because of it.

Now we have some asshole thats going to release a bunch of Top Secret Info and what's our government doing about it?

Too bad we have a spineless president, Reagan would have someone put a bullet in the back of his head, but our present administration is trying to talk him into not releasing this?

I don't have any issues with it at all. In fact I have looked at some of the reports and docs that I sent up the chain when I was in Iraq in 2004, 2005, 2006. (They were very hard to find in the thousands of docs on wikileaks) Nothing in anything I have seen is of value to anyone at this point in time. Maybe a little embarrassing to some folks. I still hold an active TS (SCI) clearance for contract work that I do off and on. Trust me, none of what is being released is Top Secret, at best it is confidential..

theking · 11-28-2010, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendorous_Male

Sounds like load of crap to me.

"US officials recently acknowledged for the first time that US submarines could not readily locate an Akula submarine operating off the coast of the USA. "It is difficult to find the most advanced Russian Akula class submarines when they operate at tactical speed or less," Admiral Jeremy Boorda said. Other military experts sounded the alarm as early as 1988. Anthony Batista, senior staff member of the Armed Forces Committee declared, "The Akula is the best submarine in the world today." A recent report from the Office of Naval Intelligence noted that the improved Akula submarines could indeed surpass the quieting of the Los Angeles class at tactical speeds. On August 9, 1995, during a lobbying effort on behalf of the Seawolf and the following Virginia class submarines, retired Vice Admiral E.A. Burkhalter announced that the $7 billion-per-year Russian program had produced "the Akula submarine, which is quieter than Seawolf." In an effort to raise public awareness, Martin Marietta, a leading defense contractor, ran ads featuring the Akula class in a number of newspapers including the San Diego Union-Tribune. While it may be difficult to separate the hype military supporters chronically use to "talk up a potential threat, in order to justify their own building programs" from the actual capabilities obscured by Russian secrecy, one impression remains: America can no longer claim uncontested dominance of the oceanic strata."

However it is still true that the USSR's attempt to stay up to par in the Arms race during the cold war lent itself to the collapse of the USSR...end of story.

Vendzilla · 11-28-2010, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiopa_Matt

Yes, the good ole' days of "bring 'em on!" sure worked out well for everyone.

Where did you get that?

[QUOTE=theking;17734050]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiopa_Matt

Well...that policy has sent tens of thousands of Muslims to see their maker...now hasn't it. The U.S. military has a kill ration of 10-1 to 100-1 and sometimes higher.

I'm a little confused, this is out of context I hope

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

you got that wrong - the world lost respect because of people like you who defend a position that has no backup - besides by a few nutcases that no one took seriously anyways. you have no idea how ridiculus your opinions look like from the point of view of the rest of the world.

Sorry, I didn't know this was a popularity contest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendorous_Male

Yes, because its them who sent the troops to war not the president that YOU voted for.

I didn't vote for him, good luck finding anyone on this forum that thinks I do

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendorous_Male

Sounds like load of crap to me.

"US officials recently acknowledged for the first time that US submarines could not readily locate an Akula submarine operating off the coast of the USA. "It is difficult to find the most advanced Russian Akula class submarines when they operate at tactical speed or less," Admiral Jeremy Boorda said. Other military experts sounded the alarm as early as 1988. Anthony Batista, senior staff member of the Armed Forces Committee declared, "The Akula is the best submarine in the world today." A recent report from the Office of Naval Intelligence noted that the improved Akula submarines could indeed surpass the quieting of the Los Angeles class at tactical speeds. On August 9, 1995, during a lobbying effort on behalf of the Seawolf and the following Virginia class submarines, retired Vice Admiral E.A. Burkhalter announced that the $7 billion-per-year Russian program had produced "the Akula submarine, which is quieter than Seawolf." In an effort to raise public awareness, Martin Marietta, a leading defense contractor, ran ads featuring the Akula class in a number of newspapers including the San Diego Union-Tribune. While it may be difficult to separate the hype military supporters chronically use to "talk up a potential threat, in order to justify their own building programs" from the actual capabilities obscured by Russian secrecy, one impression remains: America can no longer claim uncontested dominance of the oceanic strata."

Sorry, I thought you could read, I said the USSR, not russia, forgive me for thinking you could read

theking · 11-28-2010, 07:59 PM

[QUOTE=Vendzilla;17734100]Where did you get that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I'm a little confused, this is out of context I hope

Sorry, I didn't know this was a popularity contest

I didn't vote for him, good luck finding anyone on this forum that thinks I do

Sorry, I thought you could read, I said the USSR, not russia, forgive me for thinking you could read

He got it from President Bush saying it and my response is in the context of the "bring it on" statement by President Bush.

Dirty Dane · 11-28-2010, 08:09 PM

Only a portion of this is about USA.

If our governments did something wrong or illegal, then we need to know and bring justice. We need to know who we can trust and they shouldn't do something we don't want them to do. More people will suffer and die, if the wrong people rule the world. Maybe some will die in the process, there will be damage, but rather that than living with lies and die for nothing.

MaDalton · 11-28-2010, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Sorry, I didn't know this was a popularity contest

actually it's an intelligence contest - and you're about to lose it

Agent 488 · 11-28-2010, 08:14 PM

your tax dollars - your sweat and toil - you have the right to see where it goes:

http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/

Splendorous_Male · 11-28-2010, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Sorry, I thought you could read, I said the USSR, not russia, forgive me for thinking you could read

My bad, I was expecting you to know world history.

Quote:

Other military experts sounded the alarm as early as 1988

Splendorous_Male · 11-28-2010, 08:21 PM

Quote:

I didn't vote for him, good luck finding anyone on this forum that thinks I do

He was acting on behalf of American people and that includes you. I hold you far more responsible for putting your soldiers in danger than some Ausie who is exercising his freedom of speech.

theking · 11-28-2010, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rangermoore

I don't have any issues with it at all. In fact I have looked at some of the reports and docs that I sent up the chain when I was in Iraq in 2004, 2005, 2006. (They were very hard to find in the thousands of docs on wikileaks) Nothing in anything I have seen is of value to anyone at this point in time. Maybe a little embarrassing to some folks. I still hold an active TS (SCI) clearance for contract work that I do off and on. Trust me, none of what is being released is Top Secret, at best it is confidential..

While I have not gone through very much of the info...and have no intentions of going through it all...what I have seen does not seem to be of much import...other than being as you stated "a little embarrassing" and for the most part would only have a security level of "classified" or "confidential" status.

Tickler · 11-28-2010, 08:54 PM

The last big release from WikiLeaks was scrubbed for any current "top secret" information with some government co-operation. What was released contained mainly bureaucratic type of data that was perhaps classified at the time. Years later, this type of information has very little(if any) sensitivity, or current battlefield implications.

In Canada the information that we think the government was hiding, was that prisoners were being turned over to Afghan security were then being tortured. Also possibly that the government unilaterally had committed to a mission extension prior to informing the opposition parties for debate, or the general public.

Tickler · 11-28-2010, 08:57 PM

Don't forget that WikiLeaks were the ones that published the Austrailian censorship lists that not only had suspected, but other sites that were not favorable to the government.

Agent 488 · 11-28-2010, 09:06 PM

Analysis: Wikileaks vindicate, don’t damage, Israel

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=197131

who does Julian Assange really work for?

adult-help · 11-28-2010, 09:22 PM

assante needs to be a man of the year. if not decade. liars, crooks, needs to be exposed. like someone else said: the entire US (and other) government just got TSA's and balls groped by wikileaks.

stocktrader23 · 11-28-2010, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Or our president has no balls
Mass leaks like this look bad for all on this, loses respect, they have already lost a lot of that.

If it were just one thing, that I could accept, but so far, nothing has stuck out

Thing is again, it's not about what harm it does, who is to know, but secrets revealed can get our troops killed so no secrets revealed is better.

Kinda like the security of dinner at the white house, even they get crashed

Most people don't give a rats ass how it makes the President look. Transparency is more important than your perception of him, period. I sure wish there was a wikileaks for the last 100 years, could have put an end to the thousands of bullshit things our Government did and got away with for decades.

adult-help · 11-28-2010, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgtarheels

You simpleton, that isn't even close to what he said.

Wikileaks did not put the troops in harm's way.

The government and the troops themselves put themselves in harm's way.

Last time I checked, Wikileaks didn't deploy any convoys to the middle east.

absolutely! I can not believe how simple minded some people are if they think wikileaks is the one who put them in "harm's way"..

oh, and wikileaks didnt make this documents - remember, they were given to wikileaks probasbl by top US diplomats and of course military personnel. What happened with the "dont kill the messenger". It is a sad day in our time when all the dirty mess is coming out and people are angry at who leaked it instead of who made this mess in the first place..

Dirty Dane · 11-28-2010, 09:30 PM

The current Secretary General of NATO and former Prime Minister of Denmark, Anders Fogh Rasmussen gave two promises to Turkish ministers in return of them voting for him. The first was to censor a turkish television channel in Denmark and second to give them a top position in NATO. After elected, according to the leak, he didn't keep his promise and they cried about it.

Corruption and betrayal. Love it.

Vendzilla · 11-28-2010, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendorous_Male

My bad, I was expecting you to know world history.

Like I said, I was talking about the USSR, you changed the subject, please learn to read

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendorous_Male

He was acting on behalf of American people and that includes you. I hold you far more responsible for putting your soldiers in danger than some Ausie who is exercising his freedom of speech.

Who are you talking about again? And what does it have to do with keeping secrets?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

actually it's an intelligence contest - and you're about to lose it

Intelligence, the thing the CIA uses or the thing you lack? If you're going to go on about how the US is perceived in the rest of the world, thats cool, I want to pull the aid to those countries anyways

Quote:

Originally Posted by stocktrader23

Most people don't give a rats ass how it makes the President look. Transparency is more important than your perception of him, period. I sure wish there was a wikileaks for the last 100 years, could have put an end to the thousands of bullshit things our Government did and got away with for decades.

I've noticed one thing about you, you disagree with everyone

moeloubani · 11-28-2010, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Like I said, I was talking about the USSR, you changed the subject, please learn to read

Who are you talking about again? And what does it have to do with keeping secrets?

Intelligence, the thing the CIA uses or the thing you lack? If you're going to go on about how the US is perceived in the rest of the world, thats cool, I want to pull the aid to those countries anyways

I've noticed one thing about you, you disagree with everyone

I've noticed about you that when you're losing arguments you start firing away at the people arguing and say nothing about what you're actually arguing.

stocktrader23 · 11-28-2010, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I've noticed one thing about you, you disagree with everyone

If that is what you think then you have a severe problem with comprehension. It is no secret that I am a liberal, one pretty much has to be to be in this business. I'm also anti government bullshit which is a lot of what has been covered up. I'm also anti preemptive war in most cases since it makes us less safe, is usually done for political reasons only and costs us so much money that we can't afford to provide healthcare to those that need it.

Almost everything conservatives do comes down to an irrational fear, lack of understanding on an issue, absolute greed or 100% blind hatred. Since I am wholly opposed to fucking ignorance and irrational behavior those with conservative viewpoints have a tendency to really piss me the fuck off.

Almost everything you and the handful of conservative porn webmasters around here post is some off the wall misrepresentation of what is really going on or a call to stop something because it scares your spineless ass shitless. The fear is irrational in almost all cases and it's a pathetic way to live.

I do understand that conservatives are born this way, and will probably die at least as stupid as they are right now but I still put my two cents in so those that aren't irrational don't get fooled by your deceptive and / or scaredy cat bullshit. While cognitive dissonance is something you will always have not everyone reading suffers from the same affliction so my comments are aimed at them.

In short, you probably think I disagree with everyone because I am very vocal about my opinions and they are by default going to be opposite of what you, and those like you, think. I am extremely rational and use reason in everything I do. Conservatives are the exact opposite, small fucking wonder they can't see eye to eye with someone that puts actual thought into their stance.

11-28-2010, 05:13 PM	#58
craftyc Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: under your skin Posts: 162	I think more business gets done on wikileaks than on this forum! __________________ selling drunksex.com hotpornpics.com

11-28-2010, 05:36 PM	#61
rogueteens So fucking bland Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: England Posts: 8,005	The leaked US embassy cables, published on the Wikileaks site and at length in newspapers including the New York Times and the UK's Guardian, also reportedly include accounts of: Bargaining to empty the Guantanamo Bay prison camp - including Slovenian diplomats being told to take in a freed prisoner if they wanted to secure a meeting with President Barack Obama Germany being warned in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for US Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in an operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was abducted and held in Afghanistan US officials being instructed to spy on the UN's leadership by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton The very close relationship between Russian PM Vladimir Putin and his Italian counterpart Silvio Berlusconi Alleged links between the Russian government and organised crime Yemen's president talking to then US Mid-East commander General David Petraeus about attacks on Yemeni al-Qaeda bases and saying: "We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours" Faltering US attempts to prevent Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon Not exactly military secrets is it, more like just embarrasing revelations. __________________ Free traffic and backlinks from one of the fastest growing adult pinsites on the net - SAUCY PICTURES! Easily my best performing webcam sponsor - CLICK HERE!!

11-28-2010, 05:50 PM	#64
Kiopa_Matt Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,448	I think it's excellent. A more informed populous = a better country / world. __________________ xMarkPro -- Ultimate Blog Network Management Streamline your marketing operations. Centralize management of domains, pages, Wordpress blogs, sponsors, link codes, media items, sales and traffic statistics, plus more!

11-28-2010, 05:56 PM	#65
mynameisjim Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,985	This has caused a dilemma for Fox news as well. I was watching yesterday and they had a story about the counterfeit domains being seized by ICE, which they spun as more government takeovers and control. Then they ran a story about wikileaks, and the guests and host all bashed Obama for not using his new cyberlaw power to take down the wikileaks site. Can't have it both ways. __________________ jim (at) amateursconvert . com Amateurs Convert

11-28-2010, 08:54 PM	#91
Tickler Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 650	The last big release from WikiLeaks was scrubbed for any current "top secret" information with some government co-operation. What was released contained mainly bureaucratic type of data that was perhaps *classified at the time. Years later, this type of information has very little(if any) sensitivity, or current battlefield implications. In Canada the information that we think the government was hiding, was that prisoners were being turned over to Afghan security were then being tortured. Also possibly that the government unilaterally had committed to a mission extension prior to informing the opposition parties for debate, or the general public. __________________ Big Sister Live - Live sex club paid in Euros* Why all the PSYCHIC ads in the papers, and on TV? Makes $$$s on the web @ Psychic Access

11-28-2010, 05:09 PM	#56
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	http://thenextweb.com/eu/2010/08/30/...uclear-bunker/ Wikileaks now hosted from an underground nuclear bunker

11-28-2010, 05:10 PM	#57
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	WikiLeaks describes itself as “an uncensorable system for untraceable mass document leaking”. WikiLeaks is hosted by PRQ, a Sweden-based company providing “highly secure, no-questions-asked hosting services.” PRQ is said to have “almost no information about its clientele and maintains few if any of its own logs.” The servers are spread around the world with the central server located in Sweden.[54] Julian Assange has said that the servers are located in Sweden (and the other countries) "specifically because those nations offer legal protection to the disclosures made on the site". He talks about the Swedish constitution, which gives the information providers total legal protection.[54] It is forbidden according to Swedish law for any administrative authority to make inquiries about the sources of any type of newspaper.[55] These laws, and the hosting by PRQ, make it difficult to take WikiLeaks offline. Furthermore, "Wikileaks maintains its own servers at undisclosed locations, keeps no logs and uses military-grade encryption to protect sources and other confidential information." Such arrangements have been called "bulletproof hosting."[56][57] On 17 August 2010, it was announced that the Swedish Pirate Party will be hosting and managing many of WikiLeaks' new servers. The party donates servers and bandwidth to WikiLeaks without charge. Technicians of the party will make sure that the servers are maintained and working.[58][59] Some servers are hosted in underground cold war era nuclear shelters. The physical security layer is 30m White Mountains solid bedrock.[60] WikiLeaks is based on several software packages, including MediaWiki, Freenet, Tor, and PGP.[61] WikiLeaks strongly encouraged postings via Tor due to the strong privacy needs of its users.[62]

11-28-2010, 05:18 PM	#60
epitome So Fucking Lame Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: St. Petersburg, FL Posts: 12,158	Hey Vend, were you in the Navy and did you have a clearance? You never make that clear in your threads.

11-28-2010, 06:26 PM	#66
D Ghost null Industry Role: Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 9,820	http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40405218...ew_york_times/

11-28-2010, 07:16 PM	#73
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	how many soldiers killed by wikileaks so far - zero.

11-28-2010, 07:26 PM	#78
Cyber Fucker Hmm Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: On an endless road around the world for rock and roll. Posts: 12,642	To tell the truth I don't know if it's all good or bad, I'm more towards "the more info about dirty things our politicians do the better" I can already see how evil and dirty are our governments. From the other hand the more peace around the world the better, I'm not sure what future consequences of this might be, this would require long, detailed and wide analysis.

11-28-2010, 08:09 PM	#85
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	Only a portion of this is about USA. If our governments did something wrong or illegal, then we need to know and bring justice. We need to know who we can trust and they shouldn't do something we don't want them to do. More people will suffer and die, if the wrong people rule the world. Maybe some will die in the process, there will be damage, but rather that than living with lies and die for nothing.

11-28-2010, 08:14 PM	#87
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	your tax dollars - your sweat and toil - you have the right to see where it goes: http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/

11-28-2010, 08:57 PM	#92
Tickler Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 650	Don't forget that WikiLeaks were the ones that published the Austrailian censorship lists that not only had suspected, but other sites that were not favorable to the government. __________________ Big Sister Live - Live sex club paid in Euros Why all the PSYCHIC ads in the papers, and on TV? Makes $$$s on the web @ Psychic Access

11-28-2010, 09:06 PM	#93
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	Analysis: Wikileaks vindicate, don’t damage, Israel http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=197131 who does Julian Assange really work for?

11-28-2010, 09:22 PM	#94
adult-help Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 2,450	assante needs to be a man of the year. if not decade. liars, crooks, needs to be exposed. like someone else said: the entire US (and other) government just got TSA's and balls groped by wikileaks. __________________ Adult web templates, Adult WordPress Themes, TGP, MGP.. also Complete Wordpress PaySite Development - Adult WordPress Blog Themes - Free FHG Templates - Free PaySite Script - Adult Tutorials Directory - Adult Domain Marketplace - Adult Jobs

11-28-2010, 09:30 PM	#97
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	The current Secretary General of NATO and former Prime Minister of Denmark, Anders Fogh Rasmussen gave two promises to Turkish ministers in return of them voting for him. The first was to censor a turkish television channel in Denmark and second to give them a top position in NATO. After elected, according to the leak, he didn't keep his promise and they cried about it. Corruption and betrayal. Love it.