[MikeD]

Some of the controversy around these leaked Dept of State cables seems ridiculous. There's a lot of embarrassing stuff, esp. candid opinions on certain world leaders, their motives, and relationships, but these "DIPLOMATS ARE SPYING!!!! AAAAHHHH!" sorts of supposed revelations kinda fall flat.

Many in the media are making out that collecting public info like names, positions, office contact numbers, and biographies of foreign and international contacts are "spying." Seriously? James Bond apparently had it all wrong. Diplomats are supposed to make contacts and get insight about stuff. Building a phone book is now evil?

 

[stoney]

I fully support the leaks. The best way to expose the true nature of a person/organization/government is to shine light into the shadows.

 

[MikeD]

Well, some of the military leaks are resulting in people who've supported us being beheaded by the Taliban, but since we're talking about the State cables, they're not revealing much. Anyone who knows anything about the way foreign relations work will not be shocked (however much they might pretend otherwise, and use the situation to their utmost advantage) by either the overall nature of these communications or the specific information contained within.

And the uninformed are somehow led to believe that these US cables are different than the internal communications of other governments.

The biggest problem for US diplomats now is that they'll not be able to have real confidential and earnest conversations with their contacts, because no one will believe in the ultimate security of the information discussed.

Release of this info is more of a vendetta against the US by Assange than anything else.

The private who gave these cables to Wikileaks should be hung for treason. (Hey! Two calls for executions in a day! Sweet!)

 

[jonKranked]

one other thing brought to light is more information supporting the idea that the Chinese gov't was behind the google hacking last year.

 

[Silver]

Well, some of the military leaks are resulting in people who've supported us being beheaded by the Taliban,

Release of this info is more of a vendetta against the US by Assange than anything else.

Source for the first?

As for the second, so?

 

[MikeD]

Just google search it, man.

Edit: To be fair to the sharia courts, most are still investigating and not beheading. The Taliban spokesmen actually sounded quite reasonable about the whole thing.

Oh, and to the "So?" my statement was really a reply to Joker's insistence that this was driven by some desire to shed light on something or some bull**** like that. And to support the idea that the disclosure was treason on Pvt. McWeaseldick's part. Never expected it to impress you...

 

[Pesqueeb]

I fully support the leaks. The best way to expose the true nature of a person/organization/government is to shine light into the shadows.

Is Julian Assange the Daniel Ellsberg of the new century? In the vein of this topic I highly recommend the documentary "The Most Dangerous Man in America". Available on teh Netflix instant view.

 

[Silver]

Knowing the dim view that the US government takes regarding the privacy of my correspondence, I have a hard time feeling sorry for them.

At least you're not calling for bringing Assange up on treason charges. Those always amuse me.

 

[jonKranked]

I think what they (WL) are trying to do is bring the kind of transparency, and ultimately accountability, that not only US citizens, but all citizens of the world, deserve. Do I think they're going a little overboard with their mass dumps? Perhaps, but the scales must be swung far before it returns to equilibrium.

 

[jonKranked]

now their is a congressman that wants WL and assange to be considered "terrorists and spies"

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/congressman-calls-for-anti-wikileaks-offensive.ars

 

[Silver]

now their is a congressman that wants WL and assange to be considered "terrorists and spies"

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/congressman-calls-for-anti-wikileaks-offensive.ars

Peter King would know. He spent a lot of time supporting terrorism overseas.

 

[sanjuro]

I support Wikileaks but I think the soldier who leaked them should get ready for life at Leavenworth.

There is untold damage from these leaks. Other intelligence services take 2 or 3 tibits and put it together they have a spy in their midst.

Watch Fair Game to see what I am talking about.

 

[jonKranked]

interesting take on it from the Brits....


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks

 

[dante]

Peter King would know. He spent a lot of time supporting terrorism overseas.

No way, people who bomb and kill innocent civilians in an effort to gain independence for their country aren't terrorists, they're freedom fighters. As long as they're white, I guess. Organizations seeking to reveal confidential information are the *real* terrorists...

 

[MikeD]

Knowing the dim view that the US government takes regarding the privacy of my correspondence, I have a hard time feeling sorry for them.

At least you're not calling for bringing Assange up on treason charges. Those always amuse me.

Assange's just doing what he does. He should certainly face whatever charges are applicable when he's one day in the custody of those who'll charge him (Say, Sweden or the US) or will simply be assassinated by the Russians when he finally posts some of their stuff online. His day will come, one way or another, but he's just a megalomaniacal loser.

He's not a cleared US citizen sworn to protect the country like that ****bird soldier.

 

[Silver]

but he's just a megalomaniacal loser.

Sounds like General or Senator material to me...

 

[jonKranked]

I thought he was albino?

 

[jonKranked]

also interesting to see some of the relevations about N Korea....

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/wikileaks.new.documents/index.html?hpt=T2

 

[dante]

I ROR'd.

I can't understand why some on the right are claiming this is treason, since the main embarrassment is for other countries. Maybe these other countries should stop pussyfooting around the issues and start admitting openly what they've been saying in private the last 10 years. The world would be a better place...

 

[jonKranked]

I ROR'd.

I can't understand why some on the right are claiming this is treason, since the main embarrassment is for other countries. Maybe these other countries should stop pussyfooting around the issues and start admitting openly what they've been saying in private the last 10 years. The world would be a better place...

seriously!

the headline of the UK article I posted:


"The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment"

certainly rings true.

Unfortunately, the media is too cozy and buddy buddy with the powerful here.

 

[MikeD]

I ROR'd.

I can't understand why some on the right are claiming this is treason,

Because it is.

Someone sworn to protect and defend the country abused his trust beyond imagining...


----
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason

 

[jonKranked]

the tricky part in trying him for treason is proving that his intent was to aid the enemies of the US.

 

[dante]

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason

Uh, care to point out exactly how this is giving aid and comfort to our enemies? Already there has been admissions by some that this has been MUCH harder on countries like North Korea and Iran, to the point that Ahmadinejad is claiming that Wikileak is one big US conspiracy. Also, Pentagon officials have admitted that they have no evidence that anyone has been killed because of past (or current) leaks.

 

[MikeD]

Yeah, no one gets convicted for it anyhow.

I just think the UCMJ should be used to find a nice cozy gallows for him somewhere.

Espionage is also a death penalty offense. Hmmm.

 

[MikeD]

Uh, care to point out exactly how this is giving aid and comfort to our enemies? Already there has been admissions by some that this has been MUCH harder on countries like North Korea and Iran, to the point that Ahmadinejad is claiming that Wikileak is one big US conspiracy. Also, Pentagon officials have admitted that they have no evidence that anyone has been killed because of past (or current) leaks.

Hm, funny, because the Taliban's actually begun investigating individuals named in the previous leaks. And the sharia courts won't exactly be debating the legal fineries of torturing and beheading those who've worked with us. But being brown people, none of the noble Wikileaks supporters care about them, it seems.

Anyhow, the information here is of obvious aid to our enemies (and our allies, who still want to gain advantage over us). It allows them to know candid opinions and strategies. Economic strengths and weaknesses. The actual motivations behind actions taken on the world stage. In some cases, it provides operational details.

Now, although the leak was filtered through Wikileaks and not handed to another specific world power or terrorist group, it's been disseminated worldwide for everyone to read. So any and all enemies of the US have access to this information, and with the sheer volume, there's something pertinent to anyone who cares to use it against us.

Again, though, no one actually gets convicted of treason, so it's one of those moo points. Cow's opinions, really.


The idea that these aren't damaging to the US, though, is laughable. The sources of information we rely on to get information through diplomatic contact will never speak to us again. No one new will come forward with truthful information, trusting it's being given in confidence. These contacts are the stuff foreign policy is made of and for.

And when, based on the earlier military operational leaks, the Taliban's headhunting for our friends in Afghanistan, it's certainly damaging to us and those who are suffering directly for their engagement of us. (Not that I blame the Taliban for doing it...they're looking for traitors themselves...)

 

[jonKranked]

re: espionage:

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl106a.htm

“(1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph (2), either directly or indirectly, anything described in paragraph (3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns (A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, (B) war plans, (C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or (D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

(2) An entity referred to in paragraph (1) is—

(A) a foreign government;

(B) a faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States; or

(C) a representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen of such a government, faction, party, or force.

(3) A thing referred to in paragraph (1) is a document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense.

(b)

(1) No person may be sentenced by court-martial to suffer death for an offense under this section (article) unless—
(A) the m bers of the court-martial unanimously find at least one of the aggravating factors set out in subsection (c); and
(B) the members unanimously determine that any extenuating or mitigating circumstances are substantially outweighed by any aggravating circumstances, including the aggravating factors set out under subsection (c).

(2) Findings under this subsection may be based on— (A) evidence introduced on the issue of guilt or innocence; (B) evidence introduced during the sentencing proceeding; or

(C) all such evidence. (3) The accused shall be given broad latitude to present matters in extenuation and mitigation.
(c) A sentence of death may be adjudged by a court-martial for an offense under this section (article) only if the members unanimously find, beyond a reasonable doubt, one or more of the following aggravating factors:

(1) The accused has been convicted of another offense involving espionage or treason for which either a sentence of death or imprisonment for life was authorized by statute.
(2) In the commission of the offense, the accused knowingly created a grave risk of substantial damage to the national security.

(3) In the commission of the offense, the accused knowingly created a grave risk of death to another person.

(4) Any other factor that may be prescribed by the President by regulations under section 836 of this title (Article 36).”

this one might be tricky too. wikileaks isn't a foreign gov't or an agent of a foreign govt'. also, the burden of proof that his actions would knowingly create grave risk / death to another person, or that he knowingly created a grave risk to national security.

also, in regards to this case:

http://court-martial.com/ucmj-and-espionage/

 

[MikeD]

re: espionage:

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl106a.htm




this one might be tricky too. wikileaks isn't a foreign gov't or an agent of a foreign govt'. also, the burden of proof that his actions would knowingly create grave risk / death to another person, or that he knowingly created a grave risk to national security.

also, in regards to this case:

http://court-martial.com/ucmj-and-espionage/

Yeah, no way does Wikileaks meet the elements of the offense there.

 

[Silver]

Hm, funny, because the Taliban's actually begun investigating individuals named in the previous leaks. And the sharia courts won't exactly be debating the legal fineries of torturing and beheading those who've worked with us. But being brown people, none of the noble Wikileaks supporters care about them, it seems.

I missed those posts where you decry the firing of hellfire missiles into wedding parties, the special forces guys who dug their bullets out of a couple of Afghan women, etc etc etc etc.

It's touching that you all of a sudden care, but actual harm caused trumps theoretical harm.

"We really ask a lot of our young service people out on the checkpoints because there's danger, they're asked to make very rapid decisions in often very unclear situations. However, to my knowledge, in the nine-plus months I've been here, not a single case where we have engaged in an escalation of force incident and hurt someone has it turned out that the vehicle had a suicide bomb or weapons in it and, in many cases, had families in it."

He continued: "That doesn't mean I'm criticizing the people who are executing. I'm just giving you perspective. We've shot an amazing number of people and killed a number and, to my knowledge, none has proven to have been a real threat to the force."

God forbid we criticize the people who kill innocent people in their own country...that would be unAmerican®.

 

[dante]

Also, if the US gov't cared so much about these brown people, wouldn't they have actually taken up Wikileaks on their offer to work with them to redact sensitive information and names?

Johnson said the Pentagon would not collaborate with WikiLeaks. “The Department of Defense will not negotiate some ‘minimized’ or ‘sanitized’ version of a release by WikiLeaks of additional U.S. government classified documents,” Johnson wrote in the Aug. 16 letter.

 

[MikeD]

War means fighting, killing, and death. War among civilians means many of them will die.

This is why America should not fight wars except of necessity, and I don't even see Afghanistan as a war of necessity beyond what should have been an initial punitive strike against the Taliban...and even that is debatable. Iraq, well, you know my feelings on that cluster**** from the beginning.

But I don't criticize anyone on the ground for protecting himself. I do condemn those who willfully murder civilians by killing outside of their need to protect themselves or accomplish their missions within the rules of engagement they're given.

 

[Silver]

War means fighting, killing, and death. War among civilians means many of them will die.

This is why America should not fight wars except of necessity, and I don't even see Afghanistan as a war of necessity beyond what should have been an initial punitive strike against the Taliban...and even that is debatable. Iraq, well, you know my feelings on that cluster**** from the beginning.

But I don't criticize anyone on the ground for protecting himself. I do condemn those who willfully murder civilians by killing outside of their need to protect themselves or accomplish their missions within the rules of engagement they're given.

Ah, I assume you support roadside bombs and the like then? Because if you're an Afghan or Iraqi, your chances of mortal injury seem to go up when Uncle Sam is around playing with his toys.

 

[valve bouncer]

Assange was a hacker in a former life so I can see where some of the urge "stick it to the man" might come from. He stayed firmly out of the limelight even until earlier this year. An interview he did with the SBS program "Dateline", aired in May this year, was I believe his first and is notable for his reluctance to talk.
http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/watch/id/600572/n/The-Whistleblower

 

[Pesqueeb]

Should we start a pool on how much the DOW will drop when this info is released, should the claims be true?

The WikiLeaks website claims it is the target of another powerful cyber attack. Officials with the website made the claim Tuesday in a Twitter message.

This is the second time in three days that the WikiLeaks site has come under attack. Hackers also attacked the site Sunday, before WikiLeaks released more than a quarter-million sensitive U.S. diplomatic cables.

In both attacks, hackers flooded the website with requests for information in order to essentially make the site inaccessible to other users.

Also Tuesday, Forbes magazine reported WikiLeaks plans to release documents from a major U.S. financial firm early next year. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told the magazine the tens of thousands of documents will expose what he called "the ecosystem of corruption."

Assange is an Australian citizen and former computer hacker.

The United States has condemned the release of the documents, which reveal details of candid U.S. diplomatic assessments of world leaders and events. They also quote top-level discussions with officials around the world.
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/WikiLeaks-Site-Under-Attack-Again-Promises-Major-Release-on-US-Bank--111049494.html

 

[jonKranked]

perhaps this is the beginning of the world changing events that the Mayans foretold for 2012

 

[jonKranked]

also, I wonder who's behind the attacks (to the site).

 

[Inclag]

Should we start a pool on how much the DOW will drop when this info is released, should the claims be true?

Unfortunately I'm not to optimistic about this forthcoming leak and what kind of effect, if any, it will have. Understandably, there is a significant portion of the population that has sat back in their sofa and is now critiquing, horrified, shocked, or unable to comprehend some of the subject matter that has been posted on wikileaks. As MikeD put it, for those "in the know" there is probably not much in there that comes as a surprise and for the public figures that are currently pleading ignorance or find some of the subject matter abhorring, they are likely being insincere at best. However, when it comes to the financial industry, I'm a bit more cynical. It was this larger sector of the population that was sitting about on their sofas practicing selective ignorance and greed, being as much enablers as well as contributors, that turned financing into what it has become. Why would anyone care or listen to what deep down they already know?

I find it discerning that I know many brilliant young engineering minds that decided to hop off the wagon immediately after graduating for a posh $160K (no experience) straight out of school salary at some of our countries leading financial institutions. Makes me wonder if I'm doing it wrong and makes me pity some of the "Insert State" University folks I know that work at these financial institutions and make peanuts not knowing that they're merely pencil pushers and pawns...

 

[Inclag]

also, I wonder who's behind the attacks (to the site).

I'm of the opinion that they are likely countries/entities trying to fish out and extract all information for their own utilization and not so much people purposely trying to shut down the site. Although maybe that is the case

 

[jonKranked]

I'm of the opinion that they are likely countries/entities trying to fish out and extract all information for their own utilization and not so much people purposely trying to shut down the site. Although maybe that is the case

they're getting hit with DDoS attacks. Those don't extract information. They flood a site with traffic to overload the hosting servers in an attempt (typically successful) to shut the site down temporarily.

 

[stoney]

Mike - One note, we are not at war. War can only be declared by the US Congress, and it hasn't since WW2. What we are doing is policing, and the fact that Congress and the Govt are referring to current events as war either defines knowledgable hypocracy or uninformed leadership.

 

[Pesqueeb]

stuff.....

Oh, I don't mean to imply that its going to come as a real surprise that a particular financial institution(s) and the people who work there are as crooked as a dogs hind leg. Everyone know that already. What I suspect/fear is that the docs will show that one or more MAJOR financial institutions are insolvent. While anyone following the financial crisis will not be particularly surprised by this, the outing of proof that a bank(s) is/are insolvent has the potential to bring the whole house of cards crumbling down right now in a way that will make people look back on the Bear Sterns failure in 2008 as the "good old days".

As for the second half of your post, you should pick up a copy of Michael Lewis’s book titled “Liars Poker”. What you suspect is eloquently proven in his book.