Threats to WikiLeaks "damages Australia" - Herald Sun

[El Presidente]

http://sowhyiswikileaksagoodthingagain.com/

Hang on while I hop up on my high horse again.

Let me repeat I don't trust any government no matter what persuasion.

As for the sowhyis site above. i would give them a scintilla of credit if they had pop up boxes also showing (examples only)

"99% of Muslims in Iraq are killed by fellow Muslims"

"99% of global terrorism today is Islamic"

You won't see it because it doesn't suit their agenda.

A pox on their house and another for political government.

[Colt45]

Hang on while I hop up on my high horse again.

If you read it on the internet, it must be true......

[frenchkiwi]

A major issue here is that the jerk-off that started all of this crap, the U.S. military clerk ... STOLE the documents, plain and simple.

If there's a need to become a whistleblower, that's one thing - there's a process and protections in place to do it the right way.

um sorry to nitpick, but i don't think you'll find too many protections in place for whistleblowers until after they blow the whistle. they break their confidentiality agreements every time to expose other, greater, crimes.

by this line of reasoning, Watergate (break-in), Iran-Contra (leak), Bernie Madoff (leak - betrayed by his own sons), just about any corruption scandal in any country, private or public sector, should not come to light because of confidentiality...

and many criminals shielded by it.

People are in an uproar if the government peeks into their private documents and files, so why should it be any different when the shoe is on the other foot?

... because they represent the people and their interests and not the other way around...?

[DrunkenMonkey]

JC, not really at all - I don't really care all that much and am in no way embarrassed. In that light, perhaps I should just keep my mouth shut.

What perhaps has rubbed me the wrong way is how from time to time, over the past five plus years, some non Americans have for some reason or other felt

some sort of entitlement in speaking about America, Americans, and American politics. Then when someone pushes back, they get all indignant.

And heaven forbid if the shoe was ever put on the other foot. You've been a member here for quite some time - can you ever recall an American

member instigating a political discussion about a country other than their own - meddling in someone else's politics? I'm not saying it hasn't happened,

but I can't recall it if it has, though I think I'd remember the whining outcry.

Ok, I'll take a swing at the slow, hanging curveball:

"can you ever recall an American

member instigating a political discussion about a country other than their own - meddling in someone else's politics? I'm not saying it hasn't happened,

but I can't recall it if it has, though I think I'd remember the whining outcry."

You can't recall an American ever instigating a political discussion about a country other than their [his] own?  How about every discussion we've ever had about Cuba's government?  The reason you can't recall the "whining outcry" is because it never happens. It only happens when someone is critical of the US, and then only from the few of you whose panties are particularly prone to bunching. I think you ought to chill yourself, allow others to express their (in this case, at least) reasonable and considered opinions, listen respectfully, and if you disagree with the content of the opinion, then feel free to argue. It's offensive the way you tried to shut down the argument out of hand, simply because the person who you disagree with isn't an American. 

I suppose I shouldn't also point out the irony of an American insisting that one country shouldn't meddle with the politics of another. 

[Colt45]

It's offensive the way you tried to shut down the argument out of hand, simply because the person who you disagree with isn't an American. 

If you really believe I've tried to shut down the thread, you're waaaaaaaaaaaay off base. I've said what I had to say and the thread has continued on.

[DrunkenMonkey]

If you really believe I've tried to shut down the thread, you're waaaaaaaaaaaay off base. I've said what I had to say and the thread has continued on.

I didn't say you tried to shut down the thread. You tried to shut down a particular guy's argument, but not on the merits of the argument. You said: "If you were an American, you'd have a claim, but you're not, so you don't.".

I wasn't trying to suggest that you were trying to stop the thread, and certainly I wasn't asserting that you somehow had stopped anything. I wasn't even trying to give the impression that I thought you had won that particular point. On the contrary.

[Colt45]

You tried to shut down a particular guy's argument

Ooops!

If you truly believe I tried to shut down anyone's argument, you're waaaaaaaay off base. I've said what I had to say and the discussion has continued on.

Better?

[DrunkenMonkey]

Ooops!

If you truly believe I tried to shut down anyone's argument, you're waaaaaaaay off base. I've said what I had to say and the discussion has continued on.

Better?

Sure, that's fine. So that's your argument, then? That I'm waaaaaaaaay off base? So what was that point you were making, if not dismissing the argument out of hand, rather than arguing it's merits?

[Colt45]

Sure, that's fine. So that's your argument, then? That I'm waaaaaaaaay off base? So what was that point you were making, if not dismissing the argument out of hand, rather than arguing it's merits?

Frenchkiwi would have been well within his rights to simply tell me to piss off, but it still would most likely have been the end of my participation.

My reply to JC is pretty much as clear as I can be.

Rob brought up the Greece thread, calling it the political discussion of the year - to my recollection, it wasn't exactly warm and fuzzy. The best part

for me? Our Greek members who stood up for themselves (at least one person joined just to do so).

[ARRV]

Why doesn't wikileaks focus on important things like the exchange of information between the Australian cricket selectors to ascertain whey they think Clark should be the next captain? Or how they could pick North. Ever.

Without wanting to get too involved - a couple of things strike me about the whole wikileaks thing:

(a) this dude Assange is seriously looking to be charged by the US - there is one obvious matyr in the making/waiting.

( isnt there some kind of delta force which is supposed to sort such problems out? [only half joking here]

© others will take his place

(d) everyone in politics (and dont for one second think wikileaks is not involved in politics) lies and cheats to enhance their own prospects in life - country / personal / financial etc

(e) everyone has to deal with the consequences of their actions

[dicko]

Why doesn't wikileaks focus on important things like the exchange of information between the Australian cricket selectors to ascertain whey they think Clark should be the next captain? Or how they could pick North. Ever.

Now that would be scary reading...!

[sloth]

now that the college football regular season is over... i thought I'd see what has been going on in the world...

whats up?