The Wikileaks databank

[sandinista]

Sandy V., when do you post anything that isn't a troll?

when do you post anything not about me? I mean I know you love me...but...one track mind.

[sandinista]

and he can't even stop after being told on numerous occasions, just keeps on trucking with "Then you showed up, naturally defending this intellectual giant" referring to Gawd. I mean it's like he has Tourettes or something.

Hey dude, if you're putting yourself in Gawd's political camp, then you deal with the assessments about him coming your way as well.

I'm not putting myself in anyone's "camp", but if I had to choose between him and you, I'd go with him, and I don't even know anything about Gawd, haven't read many of his posts, I do know I don't need to follow the troll named ian.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Sandy V., when do you post anything that isn't a troll?

when do you post anything not about me? I mean I know you love me...but...one track mind.

You don't even deny it. Case closed.

[sandinista]

Sandy V., when do you post anything that isn't a troll?

when do you post anything not about me? I mean I know you love me...but...one track mind.

You don't even deny it. Case closed.

Why would I deny your love for me? I may not return it, but, hey whatever floats your boat old man. Fantasize all you want.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Sandy V., when do you post anything that isn't a troll?

when do you post anything not about me? I mean I know you love me...but...one track mind.

You don't even deny it. Case closed.

Why would I deny your love for me? I may not return it, but, hey whatever floats your boat old man. Fantasize all you want.

Troll on. You have no other purpose here.

[Gawd]

Gawdzilla, do you ever post anything in politics that is actually about the thread?

[Trolldor]

*snore*

Man you guys are boring. Ian is the only one who actually provides reasons, not ideology, for his position.

[Gawd]

*snore*

Man you guys are boring. Ian is the only one who actually provides reasons, not ideology, for his position.

And exposing American crimes and hypocrisy is not a valid "reason" I see.

[sandinista]

Gawdzilla, do you ever post anything in politics that is actually about the thread?

no, he doesn't, just a big, fat old troll. Useless.

[Ian]

*snore*

Man you guys are boring. Ian is the only one who actually provides reasons, not ideology, for his position.

And exposing American crimes and hypocrisy is not a valid "reason" I see.

I'd like you Assange apologists to do me a favor. Read through the listing of every one of those diplomatic cables that have been released. Note the ones that actually constitute "whistle-blowing", and compare them to the rest. If you're honest or rational enough to do that, you find out that, lo and behold, the vast majority of those cables are not embarassing for the US so much as other governments, avoiding decisiveness on common problems through cowardice and hypocrisy. I've really been enjoying the Wikileaks-related news the past two weeks.

In case you haven't noticed, the public relations battle is going very, very badly against Wikileaks. And with it, they're now losing some practical battles - funding sources, computer servers, etc.

Don't get me wrong - I like the concept of that website. But its operation, particularly since the dump of the diplomatic communications , has shown its current leadership to be grossly irresponsible. Their greatest liability is Assange. Wikileaks ought to stay alive. To do that, the staff is going to have to replace Assange.

[Gawd]

Ian, if you haven't noticed, it's the US government that is losing the PR battle. The NYT exposed that the US knows that it is the primary source of funds for terrorists through Saudi Arabia and not the other Arab nations that it has invaded and wrecked. That's pretty damn embarrassing and puts further evidence for war crimes against the US when it invaded Iraq. Also, there is a little grassroots group called Anonymous. Maybe you've heard of them.

[Ian]

Ian, if you haven't noticed, it's the US government that is losing the PR battle. The NYT exposed that the US knows that it is the primary source of funds for terrorists through Saudi Arabia and not the other Arab nations that it has invaded and wrecked. That's pretty damn embarrassing and puts further evidence for war crimes against the US when it invaded Iraq. Also, there is a little grassroots group called Anonymous. Maybe you've heard of them.

LOL! Yeah, I've heard of them - a handful of hackers that are attacking credit card sites and such, making yet more people less sympathetic to their little quasi-anarchist cause. Look around the media a little more - Wikileaks is getting raked over the coals since it started dumping diplomatic cables.

I'm happy to admit that secrecy for secrecy's sake does not make sense. Can you admit that transparency for transparency's sake is just as bad? (If you can't then you really need to work on your critical thinking!) That's what Wikileaks has been proving to the world lately, that they're completely unethical and oblivious to collateral damage, all for the sake of what they call transparency.

A couple days ago they released a list of various sites the US considers crucial to healt, economic and military security, from the Panama Canal down to vaccine factories in Holland. Now you tell me - is this whistle-blowing? Does releasing this list to the public do the slightest bit of good for the world, or for ideals of transparency? Or is it not only wrong, but counter-productive? If you're at all intelligent, you won't even try to come up with a clever or snide answer for this one. It would just be reaching for excuses, and that would be shameful.

[Gawd]

Oh, so you prefer to be oblivious to all that your evil government does like the detention centers that torture people and all the kickbacks that the fatcats get from those contractors that build all those over priced insecurity buildings that you don't have a clue what they are even for. A democracy is not about repressing what your government does. It is about being informed and having a voice. What you advocate is closer to Stalin era communism.

[Ian]

Oh, so you prefer to be oblivious to all that your evil government does like the detention centers that torture people and all the kickbacks that the fatcats get from those contractors that build all those over priced insecurity buildings that you don't have a clue what they are even for. A democracy is not about repressing what your government does. It is about being informed and having a voice. What you advocate is closer to Stalin era communism.

Well, I work in one of those over-priced insecurity buildings, so I have a pretty darn good idea what they are for. What I'm really trying to do is build bridges - we in the intelligence community are not some shadow government or secretive ruling class.

As for the rest of that last post: it's total hyperbole and not worth a response. I prefer to be oblivious and live in Stalin-like communism, eh? Yeah okay, that makes a lot of sense.

[Gawd]

Oh, so you prefer to be oblivious to all that your evil government does like the detention centers that torture people and all the kickbacks that the fatcats get from those contractors that build all those over priced insecurity buildings that you don't have a clue what they are even for. A democracy is not about repressing what your government does. It is about being informed and having a voice. What you advocate is closer to Stalin era communism.

Well, I work in one of those over-priced insecurity buildings, so I have a pretty darn good idea what they are for. What I'm really trying to do is build bridges - we in the intelligence community are not some shadow government or secretive ruling class.

As for the rest of that last post: it's total hyperbole and not worth a response. I prefer to be oblivious and live in Stalin-like communism, eh? Yeah okay, that makes a lot of sense.

THIS explains a lot. So you're one of "those" people that do the repressing. Guess you should know that Anonymous is not a single group, but I bet you prefer to label that as such for demonizing.