Taliban Murders Afghan Elder, Thanks Wikileaks for Revealing "Spies"

[Ridge]

Also, wouldn't having military strategies and schedules leaked be an excellent reason to pull out, at least temporarily?

Talk about biased and flawed logic. HOW is needlessly endangering more soldiers and getting them killed going to help? The leaker probably WOULD like to have the US pull out of the war, but to get the ball rolling by making it easier for the enemy to kill his comrades is nothing short of treason.

 

[No Limit]

I actually agree with Ridge, well ok I really don't, but maybe a little bit. If he was actually leaking information that would kill troops he would be one evil prick and should be prosecuted for it.

But of course as we all already established that is not the case. At worst he put some informants lives in danger but even that sounds like bullshit right now. What he did do is establish that our government is corrupt and is involved in crimes at the highest levels. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[huntingbear]

closing of wikileaks in 3....2.....1

 

[No Limit]

closing of wikileaks in 3....2.....1

Not gonna happen, atleast not any time soon.

 

[Stigmata]

Talk about biased and flawed logic. HOW is needlessly endangering more soldiers and getting them killed going to help? The leaker probably WOULD like to have the US pull out of the war, but to get the ball rolling by making it easier for the enemy to kill his comrades is nothing short of treason.

I see your point. And to counter, I'd say the greater treason is what government officials do to enable this kind of uncoverable corruption in the first place. But really, I do see your point. It's a hugely unfortunate catch-22.

 

[Ridge]

I see your point. And to counter, I'd say the greater treason is what government officials do to enable this kind of uncoverable corruption in the first place. But really, I do see your point. It's a hugely unfortunate catch-22.

I do agree with that. There definately needs to be greater oversight into stuff like this, and with harsh penalties for those found to be commiting the acts...

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Or the guy gets a hard-on when he leaks stuff. "Oooh secrets! Let's take it all out to the public! I don't care what it contains!"

This is exactly what happened. The guy got caught because he was bragging online to a computer hacker over chat who then turned him in.

There was a bit of shocking info in there, but the vast majority of what he released was useless (not useless, but just not provocative nor shocking)

If he had real issues with what he was sending them, he would've sifted through it and sent the priority things. Just sending and subsequently uploading tens of thousands of pages of documents was pretty stupid.


Wikileaks is overall a good thing for the citizenry, but I think they should be more careful about what they release. I'm NOT saying they should censor info, but releasing documents that are not really 'issues' and just reveal people's names and personal info is pretty dumb. They should be more selective about the releases. I think that has more to do with just uploading it immediately without sifting through it though, like I said.


Supposedly this guy also said the cables contained "SUPER PROVOCATIVE" info about the state department, Hillary Clinton, and many OTHER nation's leaders and governments. If he gave it to wikileaks, why is that not released? Either it wasnt true, or wikileaks founder does not want to upload it. He's probably avoiding a fight with the state department & the rest of the US gvt- they have the issue over him of him using wikileaks money for his personal use and I dont think he wants to enrage the US gvt. They're pissed about this, but information along the lines of "damning" wasn't really released and I dont think they ever will. If he released THAT info then you would really see the meaning of "pissed"

They wont ever release it (if it does exist in the first place) but they should.

 

[Krynn72]

This is exactly what happened. The guy got caught because he was bragging online to a computer hacker over chat who then turned him in.

It wasn't that he was bragging that he got caught. It was because he was a moron. While bragging he was using the username "Bradass87." So once the govt learned about the leak and the bragging, they simply looked for anyone who had access to the documents that was named Brad and who was born in 1987. The idiocy confounds me.

 

[Gargantou]

I am so proud that Wikileaks is hosted in my country.

Mainly because of the giant **** YOU the gave to the Church of Scientology after leaking their internal documents and manuals and shit.

 

[No Limit]

...

So you are still on the side of the apache video didn't matter even with everything said above?

 

[CptStern]

for those who have an objection with sites like wikileaks leaking information:

do you think the pictures of the abuse of detainees in abu ghraib should never have been released to the public as well? there were american casualties that were directly caused by the leak of those photos. should the american public have remained ignorant of criminal actions of their government for the sake of saving the lives of a few servicemen?

 

[Yuri]

Why is it so incredibly black and white in this thread?

There's a difference between exposing corruption and irresponsibly releasing information possibly dangerous to the safety of innocent people. Exposing Abu Ghraib and releasing tens of thousands of uncensored documents to get your dick hard are totally different things. Even WikiLeaks themselves censored the information they obtained from this attention-seeking asshole, but blanking out names doesn't stop the occasional person from being determined through context. And somebody was killed because of it. I wonder what government corruption scandal was exposed with the specific documents involved with this, now dead, man.

Does anyone here really disagree with keeping some military documents censored to the public here?

 

[No Limit]

Nobody is suggesting this is a black and white issue.

Yeah, no shit, information that truly puts people at risk and serves no public service should be kept hidden. But more often than not the government keeps information secret not because it hurts the troops or that it hurts national security. They keep it secret to cover up their own crimes and injustices.

The story that someone died has not really been confirmed, you just assume it was because the Taliban said so.

And yes, this document dump did provide us with a lot of information that the public needs to know but government does it release. Do you really need to ask this question after the discussion we had on these documents? Yes, the american people should know our military will shoot up a group of people based on nothing more than suspecion. They will then shoot up any unarmed civillians that come to help the wounded as a result of their attack.

We also learned that as we give billions of dollars to Pakistan they funnel that money right back to the Taliban who fights us in Afghanistan.

We also learned that most of the policy makers don't believe this war is winnable.

What an absurd question to ask.

Exposing Abu Ghraib and releasing tens of thousands of uncensored documents to get your dick hard are totally different things.

Wtf are you talking about? So Abu Ghraib should have been kept secret?

 

[No Limit]

Here is another useful thing that came out from this massive data dump:

Shows the war get worse and worse each year, this kind of map would have been extremely difficult to do without this data.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/201...cs-illustrated-afghan-meltdown/#ixzz0w90jt8gT

 

[Yuri]

Wtf are you talking about? So Abu Ghraib should have been kept secret?

:| Read the sentence again. Do you intentionally misread things to get your nuts in a knot? Why do you like tying your nuts up so much, asshole? jesus

Yeah, no shit, information that truly puts people at risk and serves no public service should be kept hidden.

I doubt each of these documents serve any public service, and some of them may compromise people's safety.

 

[Sparta]

I can't actually find any sources on this outside of Newsweek, which this article relies on. There's nothing on CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, I can't find it anywhere.

 

[No Limit]

:| Read the sentence again. Do you intentionally misread things to get your nuts in a knot? Why do you like tying your nuts up so much, asshole? jesus

I did read it again, here let me quote you in context:

There's a difference between exposing corruption and irresponsibly releasing information possibly dangerous to the safety of innocent people. Exposing Abu Ghraib and releasing tens of thousands of uncensored documents to get your dick hard are totally different things.

That sure sounds like you think the only reason the Abu Ghraib photos were relased was to make someone's dick hard implying that they shouldn't have.

I doubt each of these documents serve any public service, and some of them may compromise people's safety.

Did anyone say EACH document serves a public service? No, all people are saying is that many of them do.

I never heard of anyone tying their nuts up, is that a new thing you kids say?

 

[CptStern]

I doubt each of these documents serve any public service, and some of them may compromise people's safety.

you make a hell of a lot of assumptions. you have no way of knowing in either case

 

[No Limit]

Don't tie your nuts in a bunch Stern.

 

[CptStern]

I dont know what that means but then again I'm no kid :E

 

[Yuri]

uuughhhhh

This is really getting pathetic, No Limit. "totally different things" : Is this a phrase you are unable to comprehend? It seems like, 9/10 times, we start arguing about what YOU misinterpret. Seriously just shut the **** up, it is clearly not what I was saying.

You said confidential documents should not be leaked unless they serve a public service and don't compromise people's safety. I agree. Unless it passes both credentials, it shouldn't be leaked. I'm all for exposing Abu Ghraib. I'm not for releasing confidential information for no reason than to make your dick hard. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE NOW, DO YOU GET WHAT I AM SAYING

This guy released tens of thousands of documents he didn't read. Some of these may serve a public service and expose corruption. Most of them probably do not. So they shouldn't have been released.

The compromising people's safety part is difficult to determine, because it's based only on word from the Taliban. It wouldn't surprise me if true for some of the documents, though, considering blotting out names (which the original guy didn't even bother to do) will not hide the identity of everyone, given context.

And stop tying your dick into knots it is really really gross.

 

[No Limit]

"Most of them probably do not". You are basing this on...

 

[CptStern]

I have no problem releasing all documents regardless if they're read or not, regardless if it puts people in jeopardy or not. they're supposed to be working for us not the other way around; they need to be held accountable and what better way to be held accountable than through transparency. dont make decisions thta are contrary to your nation's values and the public wont have to go to drastic measure to find out what kind of shit you're doing in our names


to those that say it shouldnt be released. do you also have a problem with the Freedom of Information act? it forces government to release classified information to the public

 

[No Limit]

But you can't really apply it that broadly. There are documents that tell you where certain troops will be at a certain time and how many of them will be there. Releasing that kind of information should be criminal because that would actually endager them.

I would also apply the same reason for releasing the names and locations of informants since you would be placing their life at risk for no real reason.

 

[CptStern]

naw those things absolutely never come up as the documents are never current. it could be 50 years before the public even knows they exist. for example this was released 20 years after the fact:

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/40/055.html

 

[No Limit]

Yeah, but that's a long way from saying that all classified documents should be released. This doesn't just extend to troop movements. What about nuclear secrets? Or security details for the white house?

There are tons of information out there that should probably be left classified until it no longer poses a security risk.

 

[CptStern]

I didnt say all classified documents should be released. that's not how it works; it has to be officially requested once you determine that the documents in question actually exist. it can take several years for a freedom of information act request to be fulfilled. even then it's always redacted for security (or otherwise) concerns

 

[<RJMC>]

I wonder if wikileaks will really dare to release really important secrets

I dont think the usa and other goverments will like that

 

[CptStern]

like how they get the caramilk in a caramilk bar? zomg people are going to die!

 

[unozero]

****ing butt buddy's
but that's no surprise.

thank you for speaking on behalf of all U.S Citizens Cpt.Stern office warrior.

 

[CptStern]

****ing butt buddy's
but that's no surprise.

thank you for speaking on behalf of all U.S Citizens Cpt.Stern office warrior.

lol you make less sense than RJMC. what are you babbling a-boot? something about ****ing butt buddies? hey whatever floats your boat, who am I that I should judge, oy vey!

 

[unozero]

you and your butt buddy No Limit.

 

[CptStern]

me and my butt buddy what?

..took in a broadway show
...took a microwave cookery class
...just saved a bunch on our car insurance



what is it you're trying to say man! spit it out!

 

[No Limit]

No offense but Stern's not my type.

 

[<RJMC>]

lol you make less sense than RJMC. what are you babbling a-boot? something about ****ing butt buddies? hey whatever floats your boat, who am I that I should judge, oy vey!

atleast I am not a propaganda agent

 

[Tyguy]

Do we have a right to know how our military is conducting itself on our behalf or should we remain in total ignorance while being lied to in order to retain the illusion of progress?

I'd prefer not to be egregiously misled by my own country. I've sacrificed financially, just as many of you have, and I shouldn't have to presume the information we are given is wrong under the guise of jingoistic disinformation. This country has a long history of doing things it's own way while the civilians at home still believe we have some semblance of transparency.

Wikilinks did the right thing and hopefully this will lead to strict accountability in the future, although I won't hold my breath.

That is unless the general consensus is the ends justify the means, which is the vibe I'm getting from some of you.

 

[Sparta]

I wonder if wikileaks will really dare to release really important secrets

I dont think the usa and other goverments will like that

I don't think they've won any favours with any government at the moment anyway.

To be honest, I'd be surprised if they released their "Insurance" documents. My impression is that those documents would only be released on the condition of the U.S. or Pakistan government having attempted to or having successfully murdered one or two important Wikileaks people.

 

[Stigmata]

I don't think they've won any favours with any government at the moment anyway.

To be honest, I'd be surprised if they released their "Insurance" documents. My impression is that those documents would only be released on the condition of the U.S. or Pakistan government having attempted to or having successfully murdered one or two important Wikileaks people.

That's the plan. Although I'm sure they would be released if the US or any other major state was shifting very quickly towards a police state.

Which reminds me, I have something to download...

 

[unozero]

I have no problem releasing all documents regardless if they're read or not, regardless if it puts people in jeopardy or not. they're supposed to be working for us not the other way around; they need to be held accountable and what better way to be held accountable than through transparency. dont make decisions thta are contrary to your nation's values and the public wont have to go to drastic measure to find out what kind of shit you're doing in our names


to those that say it shouldnt be released. do you also have a problem with the Freedom of Information act? it forces government to release classified information to the public

Do I really have to point how utterly retarded this post is?
"I don't care if it puts people in life threatening danger as long as I can feel better about myself and be a indignant prick"

 

[<RJMC>]

I don't think they've won any favours with any government at the moment anyway.

To be honest, I'd be surprised if they released their "Insurance" documents. My impression is that those documents would only be released on the condition of the U.S. or Pakistan government having attempted to or having successfully murdered one or two important Wikileaks people.

I wonder if the wikileaks staff will post the info of all theyr menber and finances and such since whell,they are about all freedom of information right?