@failures art,
Quote:The above mentioned is two examples of information being held msolga. An additional example is that of all the cable WL has, how many have they made available? The only people that have them all are WL themselves, and 5 news outlets. Information to the people? Why hold back?
More to the point, we only know what Assange has based on what he admits to having. He admits to having info on American Banks in his Forbes interview. That admission should not be read as that is all he has, and if he's saying that he has something, it's because he wants people to know what he has. When the time comes to demonstrate more, he admits to having more. Why not be upfront about what you have in full?
Secrets are very valuable to this man.
He's certainly not been withholding information that points to him being responsible for the deaths of a million plus people in Iraq and Afghanistan. He doesn't keep secrets that would show him to have terrorized the country of Cuba and North Korea and ... for over half a century.
He doesn't keep secrets that would show him to have targeted civilians in Vietnam, both south and north, Japan, Cambodia, Laos, Korea, Nicaragua, the Philippines, South Korea, ... .
Quote:As have I. I've severely curbed my enthusiasm though. I originally thought this was great. I am no longer convinced.
Of course you have, Art. It conflicts with what you've heard all your life in your little echo chamber.
Quote:Assange seems very fond of the idea of his information causing political uprising, and thinks the ends justifies the means. The price after all is nothing he himself has to be concerned about.
Your hypocrisy is stunning, Failures! Why do you leap to the conclusion that he "seems fond of the idea of his info causing political uprising"? He noted that the people of Kenya had the right to know, which of course, they do. He was not responsible for what happened after in the least.
I don't hear you arguing that leaks to any US newspapers have caused any problems/deaths/turmoil.
I don't hear you chastising those portions of the US media that constantly seek to foment trouble around the world, trouble that comes, not from the release of the truth, but from US government propaganda, lies that are regularly swallowed by pablum gobblers like you.
I don't hear you registering any objections to the propaganda that is daily released to the US "media" that seeks to hide the deaths, the attacks on civilians caused by two illegal invasions.
This is stupendously amazing!
Think of the innumerable times that the USA has instigated these same things. The US is world famous for trying to force radical change with no regard to the consequences. And they don't encourage change by providing the truth. They try to enforce change by a series of lies piled upon further piles of lies.
Y'all make movies about it, spread all manner of propaganda about it then pat yourselves on the back when you create situations like the killing fields of SE Asia.
Of course, that's only for situations where they don't have military control. Where that's the case, they either murder those who are seeking a better world or, now their favorite policy, have their financially supported and trained proxies do it for them.
Quote:"Supplied" is the key word. The public won't be asked to wait to make decisions until it sees the cables of all nations. Has Australia decided after seeing this that their bureaucratic cables should be released? Has this inspired real transparency or are those documents still protected?
Your fear is palpable and telling. Your concern here is not for the truth. Your concern is that it will become clear to the people of the world just what a monster the USA has been over the last couple of centuries.
What kind of a fool would think it possible that what has so far transpired, in this new born era of daylight. would make all governments release their own documents? Why would you even raise such an inane "argument"?
If you are going to try to make your mark as a propagandist, you had better take a lesson or two from Finn or Gob1. They are better, though not by much, at deception.
Quote: Certainly releasing a list of site that the USA find vital cannot be considered in the public interest.
What you mean is "in the US's interests". The
public, say the people of Iraq or Afghanistan or Cuba or any of the numerous other countries that the US has visited great horror upon beg to differ.
Quote:Assange once said we can't have a perfect system without perfect information (paraphrased). If he is giving information piece wise and only has part of the information, how are me moving towards a better system? Instead we have partial truths and a narrative.
I'll take 'partial truth, with more to come and lots of narrative' which this is obviously generating, [much to your great dismay] over a 'series of lies and a steady stream of propaganda' any day.
