Glory Days;593618 wrote: i say let him release whatever he has hiding, like Ptown said, nothing he has released lately has been damaging to national security.

Well, sort of. I mean he still released classified documents and should be tried and throw in jail for a long time.

Speaking of political bombshells...

What happened when Obama appeared on "MythBusters"? Belly, do you know??

Glory Days;593618 wrote:which still makes him an accomplice to the crime. its like saying he didnt murder the guy, he just chopped him up and pieces and disposed the body.

i say let him release whatever he has hiding, like Ptown said, nothing he has released lately has been damaging to national security.

Then we should all expect the hundreds of other news outlets around the world to be accomplices as well. Since they published the same files in unison. Right?


...and to anyone who is calling for a hit on him, for him to be executed, or sent to prison forever without due process (or hell, even being charged with a crime at this point), you are no more american than someone from NK, China, or Iran. Being patriotic is one thing. Being a bloodthirsty unreasonable patriotic lunatic is another.

the_system;593778 wrote:Then we should all expect the hundreds of other news outlets around the world to be accomplices as well. Since they published the same files in unison. Right?

Exactly. Everyone wants his head on a platter but seems to ignore the other news outlets who are publishing these damaging national security secrets. So, a non American citizen deserves to go to jail for it, but American news outlets are fine publishing the exact same things?

Do we all really need to know what the military is planning?
Do we all really need to know what secrets Hillary has on other world leaders?
Do we all really need to know the names of our agents in foreign lands?
Do we all really need to know what our leaders think of other leaders?
Do we all really need to know where our military is hiding weapons?

Why on earth some feel it necessary to defend people that expose soldiers, informants, military secrets, locations, and strategy to our known enemies is beyond me. When our soldiers and foreign moles come down with sudden and deadly lead poisoning in their brains, then will you feel at least a little bit guilty for defending those that support letting our enemies know as much about us as possible?

BGFalcons82;594156 wrote:Do we all really need to know what the military is planning?
Do we all really need to know what secrets Hillary has on other world leaders?
Do we all really need to know the names of our agents in foreign lands?
Do we all really need to know what our leaders think of other leaders?
Do we all really need to know where our military is hiding weapons?

Why on earth some feel it necessary to defend people that expose soldiers, informants, military secrets, locations, and strategy to our known enemies is beyond me. When our soldiers and foreign moles come down with sudden and deadly lead poisoning in their brains, then will you feel at least a little bit guilty for defending those that support letting our enemies know as much about us as possible?

There have been more crimes exposed in these leaks than Assange could manage in 1000 lifetimes. I will let you guess how many of those people will ever be brought up on charges...

We do need to know when our military and diplomatic appointees commit crimes.

Names of agents should probably have been blocked out.

I Wear Pants;594327 wrote:Names of agents should probably have been blocked out.

Sure sucks to be an agent then, don't it? Oops...sorry, eh?

No, but I don't know the extent of what kinds of names were released and such as I haven't actually read the releases.

The dude who wrote the Pentagon Papers has said that nothing released endangers our security though. So that could be something.

What do you suggest be done about any crimes/nefarious activity exposed by these leaks? Leave them alone because they had to do with the military or "national security"?

the_system;594276 wrote:There have been more crimes exposed in these leaks than Assange could manage in 1000 lifetimes. I will let you guess how many of those people will ever be brought up on charges...

let me know when he releases who killed JFK and Jimmy Hoffa and where the aliens at Area 51 are. then i might care what this guy releases.

I Wear Pants;594343 wrote:What do you suggest be done about any crimes/nefarious activity exposed by these leaks? Leave them alone because they had to do with the military or "national security"?

what about the legal status of the information? could it even be used a court etc?

and this shows what?

I actually think the web and cyber attacks over the past few days to Paypal, Amazon, Visa, Mastercard and even Palin website is pretty interesting as it shows the vulnerability of the internet.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/world/10wiki.html?hp

Also, the latest releases from the last few days confirm our suspicions that:
1. Iran is shady is seeking missile components from Europe and Asia.
2. North Korea working with Burma on some sort of basic nuclear agreement for elementary nuclear technology.
3. Iran and Venezuela link is there, but solely economic and conventional miltiary.
4. The US is worried about Kosovo and European security
and 5. Qaddafi is nuts.

ptown_trojans_1;595086 wrote: 3. Iran and Venezuela link is there, but solely economic and conventional miltiary.

I read that Iran and Venezuela have a deal to place medium range Iranian missiles in Venezuela. If this is true and a missile base is opened up, medium range missiles could pose a threat to Venezuela's neighbors and some cities in the southern US. Not good if the Red Loon in Venezuela get his hands on something like this.

majorspark;595217 wrote:I read that Iran and Venezuela have a deal to place medium range Iranian missiles in Venezuela. If this is true and a missile base is opened up, medium range missiles could pose a threat to Venezuela's neighbors and some cities in the southern US. Not good if the Red Loon in Venezuela get his hands on something like this.

Yeah, I saw that today. I've been looking at it most of the morning. It was from a Germany Newspaper, "Die Welt".
Googles translation below:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article11219574/Iran-plant-Bau-einer-Raketenstellung-in-Venezuela.html&ei=FWACTdLQF4OclgfzrdG8CQ&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB4Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3DIran%2Bplant%2BBau%2Beiner%2BRaketenstellung%2Bin%2BVenezuela%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-USfficial%26prmd%3Div

I normally am cautious to reports like this, as it is just one source and we really do not know the context. It is not from the WikiLeaks documents, but from "Western security sources", so I look at it with skepticism.

It looks like it would be an Iranian base, with Iranian personnel to "deter" against the west. However, the missiles would be maxed at 1,500KM, the Shahab 3. But, that is not far enough to hit the U.S., even Miami, which is around 2,000KM away. So, that leads me to be skeptical.

Also, it could just be a propaganda move to really add more leverage in discussions.
Another take on it is here, bottom section.
http://www.kforcegov.com/Services/IS/NightWatch/NightWatch_10000306.aspx

I'm skeptical as I doubt it is true, and it would contradict the language in the WikiLeaks cables. But, if other sources come out with more info, it could add more fire to the story.

BGFalcons82;594156 wrote:Do we all really need to know what the military is planning?
Do we all really need to know what secrets Hillary has on other world leaders?
Do we all really need to know the names of our agents in foreign lands?
Do we all really need to know what our leaders think of other leaders?
Do we all really need to know where our military is hiding weapons?

Why on earth some feel it necessary to defend people that expose soldiers, informants, military secrets, locations, and strategy to our known enemies is beyond me. When our soldiers and foreign moles come down with sudden and deadly lead poisoning in their brains, then will you feel at least a little bit guilty for defending those that support letting our enemies know as much about us as possible?

Totally contrary to anything else I've seen you post in regards to big government it would seem to me.

Oh come on.

You can be against big government and still want to protect the names of agents who are working to protect us, where weapons are hidden and anything else that might jeopardize national security.

I think you pulled a muscle with that leap in "logic".

BoatShoes;595653 wrote:Totally contrary to anything else I've seen you post in regards to big government it would seem to me.

I do not believe in "no government". I also believe that their solemn duty is to protect us from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Therefore, we don't need to know every stinkin little detail it takes to protect us. If Hillary has a problem with Putin..fine. I don't want Putin knowing our strategy with him on whatever issue is on the table. Why on earth someone feels it is patriotic to lash out at our SECSTATE in order to make negotiations "fair" with a known irritant is beyond me. I don't care for Hillary's politics, but she is defending the USA and if she needs special secret info to get her job done, then I don't want some dipshit publishing it on the internet for our enemies to use against us.

I am for government protecting it's citizens. It is one of their listed duties in the Constitution. I am for the Constitution. I am against the Living Constitution.

BGFalcons82;595742 wrote:I do not believe in "no government". I also believe that their solemn duty is to protect us from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Therefore, we don't need to know every stinkin little detail it takes to protect us. If Hillary has a problem with Putin..fine. I don't want Putin knowing our strategy with him on whatever issue is on the table. Why on earth someone feels it is patriotic to lash out at our SECSTATE in order to make negotiations "fair" with a known irritant is beyond me. I don't care for Hillary's politics, but she is defending the USA and if she needs special secret info to get her job done, then I don't want some dipshit publishing it on the internet for our enemies to use against us.

I am for government protecting it's citizens. It is one of their listed duties in the Constitution. I am for the Constitution. I am against the Living Constitution.

Outstanding

I Wear Pants;594343 wrote:No, but I don't know the extent of what kinds of names were released and such as I haven't actually read the releases.

The dude who wrote the Pentagon Papers has said that nothing released endangers our security though. So that could be something.

What do you suggest be done about any crimes/nefarious activity exposed by these leaks? Leave them alone because they had to do with the military or "national security"?

Daniel Ellsburg and Mr. Assange...American whistle blower heroes. Both risked their lives in exposing horrible government activities.

Footwedge;597146 wrote:Daniel Ellsburg and Mr. Assange...American whistle blower heroes. Both risked their lives in exposing horrible government activities.

Really? Heroes? Footie...

CenterBHSFan;597150 wrote:Really? Heroes? Footie...

Of course.

Let me explain this to you. While liberals and some holier than thou libertarians are eager to point out how conservatives are anti-government, they are equally eager to label narcissistic douche bags like Assange as "heroes" for "exposing horrible government activities."

I know it gets confusing but it's the nature of the beast.

BGFalcons82;595742 wrote:I do not believe in "no government". I also believe that their solemn duty is to protect us from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Therefore, we don't need to know every stinkin little detail it takes to protect us. If Hillary has a problem with Putin..fine. I don't want Putin knowing our strategy with him on whatever issue is on the table. Why on earth someone feels it is patriotic to lash out at our SECSTATE in order to make negotiations "fair" with a known irritant is beyond me. I don't care for Hillary's politics, but she is defending the USA and if she needs special secret info to get her job done, then I don't want some dipshit publishing it on the internet for our enemies to use against us.

I am for government protecting it's citizens. It is one of their listed duties in the Constitution. I am for the Constitution. I am against the Living Constitution.

According to Majorspark's strict list like reading of the Constitution the only powers conferred on the Congress when it comes to protecting its citizens are that it may raise and army and a Navy so perhaps you can show me where in the Constitution you find something in there that grants Congress the authority to go after people dispelling secrets about the government.

No no no BoatShoes. The strict interpretation of the Constitution doesn't apply if you say you're doing something for the safety of our citizens or to stop terrorism. Because anything is alright if you're trying to stop terrorism.