US diplomatic cables to be dropped by wikileaks; US doing pre-emptive damage control

[Shojin]

Not sure if this was posted but lol



Also, a cool little site for small nuggets of info on some wikileaks accomplishments: http://sowhyiswikileaksagoodthingagain.com/

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

#1 - Of course, but if he's not doing it for that reason then wtf. He deserves w/e happens to him.

#2 - I disagree. You leak information vital to national security in a time of war. I think acting as a conduit is enough. I'll look up the act later, I'm sure it defines espionage in there. The whole publisher thing is what makes me think otherwise, and that he didn't commit espionage.

[Correction]

#2 - I disagree. You leak information vital to national security in a time of war. I think acting as a conduit is enough. I'll look up the act later, I'm sure it defines espionage in there. The whole publisher thing is what makes me think otherwise, and that he didn't commit espionage.

You're still confused about using the word 'leak' as a verb.

[archibaldcrane]

If these cables had been released directly to the New York Times instead of through Wikileaks, would we still be having this conversation?

That's my question.

[chiyio]

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairba...any_helped.php

Glad to know my tax dollars are going to host classy parties like this.

[Darkdreamer]

It's obviously a tribal dance of fertility! >.>

[Elvis]

#1 - Of course, but if he's not doing it for that reason then wtf. He deserves w/e happens to him.

#2 - I disagree. You leak information vital to national security in a time of war. I think acting as a conduit is enough. I'll look up the act later, I'm sure it defines espionage in there. The whole publisher thing is what makes me think otherwise, and that he didn't commit espionage.

We're ALWAYS at war. Dear god man. Hey Swamp, do you know anything about the Iraq sanctions? The entire sanctions regime? I'm interested in the moral argument more often than not, because the 'legal question' is usually just thinly disguised red tape.

Deserves what? You don't like the guy's politics. This has nothing to do w/ 'legal' this or 'legal' that. Be sincere, if that's possible.

[Cadsuane]

Even Daniel Ellsberg, the guy who leaked the pentagon papers, said that cablegate was a much more significant event. I'll offer possible explanations as to why there are alot of people downplaying the significance of the leaks.

1.) They have no scruples nor philosophical faculties to recognize an important revelation when it's right in front of them, and are spouting reactionary rhetoric.

2.) They didn't read the papers or any analysis thereof and are repeating the reactionary rhetoric they've heard.

3.) They're political and/or foreign policy analysts by vocation and have already guessed or head most of it, and as part of whatever elitist cabal they're a member of are disdainful of such information being digested by the general public.

4.) They're lying, and are spouting reactionary rhetoric.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Deserves what? I think I answered that, whatever happens to him. If he doesn't have some high-minded reason for this then he's just a fucking prick. I'll have no sympathy for him.

[aurik]

Even pricks are created equal and have certain unalienable rights.

[Callisto]

You can never take his god-given right to be carpetbagged and water-boarded in the basement of a shack on some unnamed island.

[BerenTebogo]

You can never take his god-given right to be carpetbagged and water-boarded in the basement of a shack on some unnamed island.

Part of me hopes that we try to do this, to force the insurance file out. Want massive drama.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

I never said b/c he's a prick he doesn't have rights.

[Correction]

I never said b/c he's a prick he doesn't have rights.

So now he doesn't deserve whatever happens to him...?

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So now he doesn't deserve whatever happens to him...?

I'm simply saying, if he did this to be a prick, I have no sympathy for him, regardless of whether his rights are violated. That sentence does not mean he isn't entitled to his rights for being a prick.

[Callisto]

Clearly Assange is just doing it to be a jerk, he also steals his neighbors' newspapers and uses the last of a paper towel roll without replacing it or telling anybody about it.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Look it's this simple, if someone does something to be a prick, which is directly responsible for the consequences he/she suffers, I have no sympathy for them. Now if he's doing this for some high-minded cause, then of course I have some sympathy if his rights are violated.

And I'm not advancing theory that he's a prick, I thought it was obvious he was doing this b/c he believes in transparency, but apparently according to aurik it may not be.

[Demosthenes11]

please don't be a defense attorney

[Demosthenes11]

please don't be an attorney

ftfy

[Demosthenes11]

please don't

last one I promise