57
   

WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

 
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 11:54 am
@failures art,
Quote:
You're betraying the events that have actually taken place.


You making a big to do by repeating a propagandist big to do over nothing more than, in your own words, "potential".

All the while, you studiously ignore the vicious criminality that WL is exposing. You sound like a Mafia Don's son - "my papa, he gives money to the church [not noting that he likely extorts them at the same time] and he helps the community".

Quote:
Loving or hating WLs or the USG is pathetically small minded. Neither deserve such a blind and loyal defense.


I have yet to note from you, Art anything that resembles an acknowledgment that what WikiLeaks is doing is good. If this had happened to China, or Iran, or [US's current hate country] there would have been threads galore with all manner of people salivating, with blood curdling screams of joy that the other "butchers" were reaping what they had sown.

Quote:
Small potatoes--but then again--not your potatoes. I guess we should not care?

This small potatoes logic is flimsy. Where else would you apply it in your own life? BP makes a huge oil spill, so it's only small potatoes if you put your used engine oil down the drain?


Shall we wait until these potatoes represent something more than your imagined garden?

Quote:
Pretending that WL is sooooo important and noble that we can't possibly care about the consequences of their actions is misguided.


Spreading incessant propaganda about the "potential" results of actions that might occur without addressing the very noble results that we would all like to see come about, except for those who love to make apologies for war crimes/terrorism, is what is misguided, Art, terribly so!
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 12:14 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
Really? So knowing that AQ might want an informant's name, you'd not protect the name? Remember, we're talking about the practice of redacting right now. You'd release the document with no care to the informant?


For ****'s sake, Art, this is all getting to be a bit too much. Who is it that has done illegal renditions, still does them, around the world? Who is it that has innocents locked up in these foreign countries where they are being tortured on the basis of lies, double dealing, ... ?

Who maintains a prison on illegally occupied land in a foreign sovereign nation where the vast majority were innocents picked up in a typically "well thought out" American plan - "we don't need any guilty people, we just need some bodies to torture".

Quote:


Quote:
WikiLeaks: Guantanamo Bay terrorist secrets revealed
Guantanamo Bay has been used to incarcerate dozens of terrorists who have admitted plotting terrifying attacks against the West – while imprisoning more than 150 totally innocent people, top-secret files disclose.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8471907/WikiLeaks-Guantanamo-Bay-terrorist-secrets-revealed.html


If you're keeping score, I think the US has managed to "convict" [= force into an admission of guilt] OBL's chauffeur. Coming up to the whatever anniversary of 9-11, that must do an American proud, a real cause for celebration.

You're really starting to sound an awful lot like A2K's two top serial deceivers, Finn and Gob1.

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 12:17 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
And, ofcoarse, you have compared what the US has done against all other countries past and current.


I've made a start, CI, but I don't believe that there's a life long enough to do it justice.

Don't you want to make clear any of the statements from your previous posts?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 12:26 pm
@JTT,
How can he make anything clear when he doesn't know what he's talking about.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 12:31 pm
@spendius,
I should have realized that was coming, Spendi. Okay, now it's your turn to be my straight man. Smile
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 12:59 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
I don't think you're that careless.


You seem to think that if I only thought harder about this, I'd come around to your way of thinking.

I've been thinking about information the U.S. government hides for several decades now. I hosted a refugee from Nicarauga and the U.S. military for some time in the 1980's. As a result of information I got through a European consul-general, I knew that diplomatic staff from some friendly countries had been warned about the event we later knew as Lockerbie at least a full month in advance. I thought very hard about the information I gained in these two cases and several other situations. I realized that nothing good was coming of the secrecy.

I am not going to come around to a view that the cables should have been hidden/protected to begin with. I think politicians/diplomats would tread more carefully if they understood that what they are saying/writing is NOT protected.

JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 01:07 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
I've been thinking about information the U.S. government hides for several decades now.


Shocked You're an old grandmother?!

Quote:
I knew that diplomatic staff from some friendly countries had been warned about the event we later knew as Lockerbie at least a full month in advance. I thought very hard about the information I gained in these two cases and several other situations. I realized that nothing good was coming of the secrecy.


Why be so circumspect about this issue, Beth? Why not discuss it in its entirety?

ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 01:11 pm
@JTT,
It does no good to talk about the details, and to demand change, on a random website. What matters is doing something in real life. That is what I chose to do.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 01:23 pm
@ehBeth,
Then why even bother talking to Art or Finn or whoever? Does it not enAble2Know people? Newspaper articles, videos, it's done everyday here, sometimes more than once.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 03:07 pm
@ehBeth,
That is a luxurious position ehBeth. You avoid dealing with a real world dilemma by stating your ideal scenario.

Reality is far from your utopic ideal where the USG (et al) doesn't include the names of the informants. Given the reality that these cables do have this information, you can't reply simply that it shouldn't be there. That's not the situation that was given to WL, Assange, The Gaurdian, etc. Lets agree that information shouldn't be there, but for sanity sake, acknowledge that the information is there.

I asked if you'd do the same as WL given the information. I do think that if you thought harder about this you'd come to the conclusion I have; that Amnesty International has; that even Wikileaks has. Saying the info shouldn't be there to begin with doesn't answer what you'd do with it if you had it.

A
R
T
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 03:12 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
I have yet to note from you, Art anything that resembles an acknowledgment that what WikiLeaks is doing is good.

I created an entire thread about how my feelings about Assange and WL had evolved. I laid plenty of praise, and even admiration for many things there. That said, I don't have to be for or against (i.e.- "with us or against us") on the matter of wikileaks. I'll give praise and criticism where I see fit. It's not all or nothing.

A
R
T
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 03:26 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
I laid plenty of praise, and even admiration for many things there.


Okay, because you say so.


Quote:
I'll give praise and criticism where I see fit. It's not all or nothing.


You're pretty damn parsimonious with the criticism of the US, Art, and NOW, big on perpetuating a damn flimsy piece of propaganda.

Where's the balance for this guy who says it doesn't have to 'all or nothing'?
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 03:38 pm
@JTT,
You are not someone seated well to ask others to temper their posts, and speak more in balance. I'm confident I've said more positive things about wikileaks, and critical things about the USG, than you've said positive things about the USG and critical things about wikileaks. Know thy self, JTT.

Perhaps you think it would make for better conversation to simply quote a bunch of post and say "right on!" Typically, I just vote up posts I like/agree with. In a thread like this, offering any view that is not 100% in line with wikileaks is akin to propaganda in your eyes. WL can do no wrong in your eyes it seems.

I feel my posts have been better spent challenging not simply repeating popular sentiment. I agree with much of what has been said here, and I even agree with what wikileaks promotes itself as. That doesn't make me anti-wikileaks or pro-government.

A
R
T
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 03:44 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
In a thread like this, offering any view that is not 100% in line with wikileaks is akin to propaganda in your eyes. WL can do no wrong in your eyes it seems.


That's false.

The difference, this massive gulf, the one that you are trying so hard to avoid, and doing a damn good job of it, is that the US is in no position to be making such a ludicrous argument, though admittedly, they often do - such is the nature of propaganda.

No comments on illegal rendition, Gitmo, the US maintaining a stable of torture palaces run by the, always ready to please, installed brutal dictators.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 03:54 pm
@failures art,
I am listening to failures art.
He and I disagree sometimes.
No serious spats that I remember.

I also listen to ehBeth. We don't spat either, usually, but may fizz wheelies.

These two are disagreeing.

I'm not clear what I think. Pro Assange takes by me are prevalent, but I get caution. I'm still on the Assange side of it.

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 04:09 pm
Just one of thousands of examples of unbelievable hypocrisy/doublespeak. Why does it seem to hum right over the heads of, what appear to be, sensible US citizens?

Quote:
U.S. Hypocrisy on Iran

by Sheldon Richman, February 2, 2007

“It has been clear for some time that Iran has been meddling in Iraq,” says White House spokesman Gordon D. Johndroe.

“We don’t believe that [Iran’s] behavior, such as supporting Shia extremists in Iraq, should go unchallenged,” John Negroponte, the U.S. intelligence boss, added.

Meanwhile, President Bush has authorized American troops to kill Iranians in Iraq if they seem to be engaged in activities hostile to the United States. He’s also sent a couple of carriers to the Persian Gulf in a show of force aimed at Iran.

In response, Iran has said it would enlarge its economic and military assistance to Iraq.

There is something surreal in all this. The U.S. government is warning Iran against meddling in Iraq. But the U.S. government is meddling in Iraq! Is there a clearer case of a pot calling a kettle black?

Neither country should be meddling, but there are important differences. Iraq is next door to Iran but far from the United States. Iraq, backed by the United States, attacked Iran in 1980, leading to a grueling eight-year war, but never attacked the America. Finally, Iran’s next-door neighbor is “hosting” 150,000 U.S. troops. No Iranian troops have been sighted in Canada or Mexico.

There’s something else that’s bizarre about the U.S. government’s warning Iran to stay out of Iraqi affairs. In 1953 the CIA executed the ultimate interference in Iranian affairs by engineering a regime change and restoring to power the brutal and hated shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

Many Americans have no idea this happened. They think the Iranian government despises America because we permit raunchy speech and abortion. One such American is Dinesh D’Souza, whose new book argues that radical Muslims like Osama bin Laden and those who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center “hate us for how we use our freedom.” D’Souza’s historical “knowledge” of U.S.-Iran relations goes all the way back to — 1979. As he wrote in the Washington Post, “President Jimmy Carter’s withdrawal of support for the shah of Iran, for example, helped Ayatollah Khomeini’s regime come to power in Iran, thus giving radical Islamists control of a major state.”

He’s got to be kidding. Does D’Souza think the forces that put Khomeini in power came out the blue unprovoked or that the revolution was motivated by Victoria’s Secret? Surely he has read about Operation Ajax, in which the CIA’s Kermit Roosevelt Jr., grandson of Theodore Roosevelt, and Norman Schwarzkopf Sr., father of the 1991 Gulf War general, conspired in 1953, along with British intelligence, to overthrow the democratically elected, though socialist, government of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and restore the despotic shah to his Peacock Throne. In the turmoil produced by a western-sponsored boycott of Iran after nationalization of the oil industry, the shah had left Tehran for a long “vacation” on the Caspian Sea and then in Baghdad. But he did not leave until he knew that a U.S. operation was under way to save him.

As author James A. Bill wrote, “The American intervention of August 1953 was a momentous event in the history of Iranian-American relations. [It] left a running wound that bled for twenty-five years and contaminated relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran following the revolution of 1978-79.”

For a quarter-century after the coup the Iranian people suffered under the brutality and secret police of the shah, a loyal U.S. ally and recipient of millions in arms and money, until they revolted under the religious leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini. They have not forgotten the U.S. government’s responsibility.

If a foreign power had clamped a despotism on us, we too might have been resentful. So perhaps the Iranian seizure of the U.S. embassy and its personnel in 1979 wasn’t so malicious. Contrary to D’Souza, the troubles did not begin in the 1970s. It is typical of too many Americans to be ignorant of the U.S. government’s foreign misconduct and then to think that any hostility toward America must be unjustified.

With Bush’s warnings to Iran, U.S. hypocrisy has reached a new low.

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0702c.asp

ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 04:14 pm
@JTT,
What, you want to be Saint Jtt?

Let us work up a path of roses.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 04:15 pm
In this we can see a fine example of the concern the US has for informers - as long as an informant serves the US's interests - good informant.

We've seen it with US installed brutal dictators - toe the US line and you can do anything imaginable you want to your countrymen and others, as long as those others aren't our others. Step out of line and you are toast.

Now, and not for the first time, the US turns on its own.

Quote:

Bradley Manning and the stench of US hypocrisy

The US condemns human rights abuses abroad yet appears to be allowing the psychological torture of Bradley Manning

Ryan Gallagher
guardian.co.uk, Friday 4 March 2011 17.48 GMT

Earlier this week, the soldier accused of leaking thousands of confidential documents to WikiLeaks, Bradley Manning, was handed an additional 22 charges as part of his ongoing court martial process. The 23-year-old, who has been in solitary confinement for more than seven months, stands accused of computer fraud, theft of public records and willfully communicating classified information to a person not entitled to receive it. He now also finds himself faced with a rare charge known as "aiding the enemy" – a capital offence for which he could face the death penalty.

The revelation will no doubt have come as a blow to Manning, although given his ongoing treatment it is likely he already feared the worst. Made to endure strict conditions under a prevention of injury order against the advice of military psychiatrists, he is treated like no other prisoner at the 250-capacity Quantico Brig detention facility in Virginia. Despite that he is yet to be convicted of any crime, for the past 218 consecutive days he has been made to live in a cell 6ft wide and 12ft long, without contact with any other detainees. He is not allowed to exercise or have personal effects in his cell, and for the one hour each day he is allowed free from his windowless cell he is taken to an empty room where he is allowed to walk, but not run.

One of the few people to have visited Manning, David House, spoke yesterday of how he had witnessed his friend go from a "bright-eyed intelligent young man" to someone who at times has appeared "catatonic" with "very high difficulty carrying on day to day conversation". House drew similarities with the case of Bobby Dellelo, an American prisoner who developed psychosis after a lengthy period in solitary confinement conditions similar to Manning's. "For me this has been like watching a really good friend succumb to an illness or something," he said. "I think that Bradley Manning is being punished this way because the US government wants him to crack ahead of his trial."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2011/mar/04/bradley-manning-us-wikileaks-hypocrisy

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 04:24 pm
It seems that Frederick Douglass, in 1852, recognized clearly what so many of you are either woefully ignorant of or mightily unwilling to face.

Larry kinda thinks so too.

Quote:
U.S. hypocrisy detonates around the world
Posted on February 6, 2011 by The Global Realm
U.S. hypocrisy detonates around the world

By Larry Pinkney
Online Journal
Feb 4, 2011

“To him [or her] your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mock; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him [or her] mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy – a thin veil to cover up crimes that would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation of the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of these United States at this very hour.” –Frederick Douglass

“Mubarak must go and so must this system!” –Egyptian Protestor, January 29, 2011, Cairo, Egypt

http://theglobalrealm.com/2011/02/06/u-s-hypocrisy-detonates-around-the-world/

JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 04:26 pm
@ossobuco,
Wouldn't that be better than the Devil's assistant, Osso?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/12/2025 at 05:26:21