[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

And don't forget the butterfly effect either. If the newspaper says troops will be hunting down terrorists or criminals in a certain area, and someone important is there who now knows to get out of town, and later masterminds an attack 10 years down the road that kills 10 000 people, thats effectively a story that got 10 000 people killed. He may not have been captured or killed, but the release of a story wiped out the chance of his destruction entirely.

Has anything like this happened, tho? Were military plans part of wikileaks, and were they leaked in a timely manner that would give the enemy advance warning? I mean if they're leaked after the operation, it's not going to serve as much of a warning to the bad guys, right? So this might just be a straw man you're building here.

Scape or Dr Caleb would know better than me if any military ops have been distributed by Assange that could endanger soldiers. If so, the media outlets leaking those should be charged with treason, and Assange with what, spying, being an enemy agent, what have you.

It always has been a strawman. This is mostly diplomatic chatter being leaked.

Who tells low level diplomats about upcoming military events? Even the Pentagon cleared the July leaks about Afghanistan from containing any sensitive information.

[Thanos]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Funny thing is Thanos, one of the leaks completely vindicated Bush's decision to go into Iraq. Some of the info from that leak paralleled some info I gave out about Iraq's chemical weapons program shortly after I started posting on here.
The problem with Iraq was, "right place, wrong plan".

Please specify which one. I'd like to see who said what to who before I'd accept that Bush is now fully vindicated. If it's coming from the Saudis or anyone like that, or the think-tank neocons at the Heritage foundation, or rightwing sites like the Weekly Standard, I'll be tossing it right into the trash as being anything remotely close to the truth.

To address Brock's point, I wouldn't characterize myself as an 'enemy' of our governments, police, military, or intelligence services; I'm fairly certain that I'm mostly on record around here of defending all four institutions against both the right- and left-wingers who incessantly keep attacking them. I will accept however that I'm any enemy of any politician that distorts the truth in order to justify unjustifiable wars that kill hundreds of thousands and, in the ultimate end, aren't going to do any lasting good anyway.

[EyeBrock]

And I agree Thanos. But in both my military and present jobs, there was a large and vocal minority that hated us just for doing our jobs. I've seen the same distaste from some posters on CKA.

Not thee though!

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Thanos Thanos:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Funny thing is Thanos, one of the leaks completely vindicated Bush's decision to go into Iraq. Some of the info from that leak paralleled some info I gave out about Iraq's chemical weapons program shortly after I started posting on here.
The problem with Iraq was, "right place, wrong plan".

Please specify which one. I'd like to see who said what to who before I'd accept that Bush is now fully vindicated. If it's coming from the Saudis or anyone like that, or the think-tank neocons at the Heritage foundation, or rightwing sites like the Weekly Standard, I'll be tossing it right into the trash as being anything remotely close to the truth.

To address Brock's point, I wouldn't characterize myself as an 'enemy' of our governments, police, military, or intelligence services; I'm fairly certain that I'm mostly on record around here of defending all four institutions against both the right- and left-wingers who incessantly keep attacking them. I will accept however that I'm any enemy of any politician that distorts the truth in order to justify unjustifiable wars that kill hundreds of thousands and, in the ultimate end, aren't going to do any lasting good anyway.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/c ... rge-w-bush.

I don't remember the thread now but way back I had posted about an Iraqi Airforce general that had provided information about stripped down Iraqi commercial airliners flying out of Iraq to Syria loaded with chemical weapon apparatus and ingredients. There was also a report leaked out of Iraq as late as 1998 that Saddam was actively pursuing a weaponized VX program.

[FieryVulpine]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

War is Peace, Ignorance is Knowledge, and Slavery is Freedom.

Which is the motto of every communist as my signature suggests.

[EyeBrock]

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

War is Peace, Ignorance is Knowledge, and Slavery is Freedom.

Which is the motto of every communist as my signature suggests.

Yep, it might be ever so amazing to Mr C, but we all did 1984 in English Lit.

We know how it goes.

[Thanos]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2010/12/larry-elder-wikileaks-vindicates-president-george-w-bush.

I don't remember the thread now but way back I had posted about an Iraqi Airforce general that had provided information about stripped down Iraqi commercial airliners flying out of Iraq to Syria loaded with chemical weapon apparatus and ingredients. There was also a report leaked out of Iraq as late as 1998 that Saddam was actively pursuing a weaponized VX program.

I'm not sure that the WMD argument is satified by the premise of Elder's column. The coalition forces were finding a lot of older battlefield chemical weaponry, dating from the first Gulf War or even earlier, and these clearly did not come close to justifying the invasion. Going by the IAEA criteria, as indicated by some of the comments following Elder's column, even possession of yellowcake uranium did not technically mean Iraq violated the WMD ban placed upon it.

Going by the post-9/11 criteria laid out by Dick Cheney himself the Americans literally had to find an active WMD programme in Iraq that was organized around the goal of detonating/releasing some kind of WMD device in an American city. This is the basis of any kind of 'smoking gun' argumentation, and the discovery of the smoking gun was what American policy was entirely organized around as the basis for their decision to invade Iraq. I'm no friend of the mainstream media, even if I no longer believe in teh myth of it being dominated and controlled by liberals up to their own nefarious propaganda purposes. But there's no way in hell such a story could have ever been supressed. Given that the entire American press corps was jockeying for embedded positions with teh invasion force, and had been almost entirely uncritical of Bush Administration motives for the war, it's no longer possible to believe that any information supression of any sort ever occurred at all.

If anything, media self-censorship in the United States is still a major problem for the press. They still want access to the bigger figures so they're still deliberately downplaying serious information and critical analysis in order to maintain their career-boosting contacts among the political and businsess elite. Hence the lack of serious reporting and journalistic analysis from the larger outlets that began around Sept 11 2001 and still continues unavbated today. It's a golden age for the lying politician because the media is still not doing it's job the way it's supposed to.

[ShepherdsDog]

Communism: The feudalism of the future.

[Canadian_Mind]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

War is Peace, Ignorance is Knowledge, and Slavery is Freedom.

Which is the motto of every communist as my signature suggests.

Yep, it might be ever so amazing to Mr C, but we all did 1984 in English Lit.

We know how it goes.

Well, communism was actually downplayed in Animal Farm, not 1984. Most kids in Canada studied that book between grades 2 and 4, then again in grades 10-11. I got it in both 2 & 3, as well as grade 10.