Wikileaks.org

[American Patriot]

Until it comes to HIS personal business. lol

[Malsua]

I suspect the next dirty trick will be a Polonium "flu" either right before or right after he releases those Russian documents.

[Toad]

I suspect the next dirty trick will be a Polonium "flu" either right before or right after he releases those Russian documents.

Yea, I think they'll find the Russians political elite aren't so ideologically locked into a lengthy legal solution to what they're doing. They may take care of business the old fashioned way.

[American Patriot]

/chuckles

[Backstop]

Yea, I think they'll find the Russians political elite aren't so ideologically locked into a lengthy legal solution to what they're doing. They may take care of business the old fashioned way.

Remember Alexander Litvinenko?

[Toad]

Remember Alexander Litvinenko?

Yep. He took a turn for the worse.

[American Patriot]

I heard he isn't feeling any pain now.

[Backstop]

Yep. He took a turn for the worse.

I heard he isn't feeling any pain now.

I also heard that before he died, he gave a glowing account of how he was poisoned. It was reported his account radiated across all international boundaries.

[American Patriot]

http://www.facebook.com/search/?q=Ju...45061177480966

Julian Assange is smarter than Litvinenko.

I seriously have doubts of your statement, Peterle.

[American Patriot]

I also heard that before he died, he gave a glowing account of how he was poisoned. It was reported his account radiated across all international boundaries.

Ok... you got the Punny Award for the week!

LOL

[American Patriot]

http://www.facebook.com/search/?q=Julian%20Assange&init=quick&tas=0.8445061177480966

Julian Assange is smarter than Litvinenko.

Here's why I don't think so:

1. In 1991, he was promoted to the Central Staff of the Federal Counterintelligence Service, specialising in counter-terrorist activities and infiltration of organised crime.
2. He was awarded the title of "MUR veteran" for operations conducted with the Moscow criminal investigation department, the MUR.
3. Litvinenko also saw active military service in many of the so-called "hot spots" of the former USSR and Russia.
4. During the First Chechen War Litvinenko planted several FSB agents in Chechnya.
5. In 1996, Litvinenko also served as a foot soldier during the Russian operation in the Dagestani village of Pervomayskoye, where two of his comrades were killed by friendly fire from the rocket artillery.
6. In 1997, Litvinenko was promoted to the FSB Directorate of Analysis and Suppression of Criminal Groups, with the title of senior operational officer and deputy head of the Seventh Section.

Among other things.

What did Mr. Wikileaks do? He was a hacker, he went to jail for hacking. He's STILL hacking. And he's screwing with the USA.

No, he's not smarter.

On the other hand, BOTH men share something in common. They are both Conspiracy Theorists. Litvinenko's conspiracies however, might have some real merit.

[Backstop]

He is not going to die.

Everybody dies.

[American Patriot]

And everyone can be "Gotten to".

Understand this Peterle, he is releasing material that is putting allies and troops into harms way. There's a reason our guys don't usually give their names these days and that's because people are constantly trying to kill THEM.

This guy is stepping on MY toes and the toes of my friends and the military of this country. He's presenting material that is cut and edited to show one side of the facts.

But more importantly, classified material being released to the general public can harm the country.

There are definitions for what makes something classified and the words "reasonably" are in them.

I'll give you this link, you can read it if you like: http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/quist2/chap_7.html

Gives definitions.

Once you understand them, understand that this guy in my view is a criminal - and as far as I am concerned he should be treated like a spy, and he and the guy who leaked the material ought to be spending a lot of time in Big Max in Florence Colorado along side of the other spies and terrorists we have here.

And further if this release of classified material results in even one death of one of our troops or allies, then he should be found guilty of treason and executed.

[American Patriot]

Peterle...

Occams Razor, lex parsimoniae. Do you know it?

Basically it states, entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem... or in English, entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity.

Essentially, there is no reason beyond money that a person performs such duties to someone else. Anyone with a lick of sense wouldn't work for another "hidden group" and reveal such things making ones self the target of nations.

They say everyone can be bought, and that perhaps might hold some water in such an argument, however being bought and being stupid aren't always related. If he is so smart, why stick his face in the public, as the face of Wikileaks and stand up as a criminal against US law when it is a well known fact that we tend to go after criminals?

Secondly, to do this for someone else and be the "fall guy"? What kind of death wish is that?

How is this guy "smart"?

[American Patriot]

Peterle, we're all pretty much well aware of /whois information - and it's a matter of public record. You can look me up, my ham callsign, my websites and you will find my home number, address, and even a google map to my home.

The difference is, I don't pass information like this clown has been doing.

No... he's not smart, not smart at all.

[American Patriot]

Obviously not....

/chuckles

[American Patriot]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

I'll quote the pertinent part....

Science and the scientific method

In science, Occam’s razor is used as a heuristic (rule of thumb) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.^[5][6] In physics, parsimony was an important heuristic in the formulation of special relativity by Albert Einstein,^[15][16] the development and application of the principle of least action by Pierre Louis Maupertuis and Leonhard Euler,^[17] and the development of quantum mechanics by Ludwig Boltzmann, Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg and Louis de Broglie.^[6][18] In chemistry, Occam’s razor is often an important heuristic when developing a model of a reaction mechanism.^[19][20] However, while it is useful as a heuristic in developing models of reaction mechanisms, it has been shown to fail as a criterion for selecting among published models.^[6] In this context, Einstein himself expressed a certain caution when he formulated Einstein's Constraint: 'Everything should be kept as simple as possible, but no simpler.' Elsewhere, Einstein harks back to the theological roots of the Razor, with his famous put-down: 'The Good Lord may be subtle, but he is not malicious.'

There's plenty more on the site, but seriously, the basic tenant is simple. Whatever the simplest explanation of a subject is generally the most correct.

[American Patriot]

Just Another WikiLeak On An Already Sinking Ship
There is nothing positive that can be said about the release of more than a quarter-million confidential American diplomatic cables by the rogue hacker organization WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks has recklessly and inexcusably put lives at risk. Any U.S. person who cooperated with WikiLeaks has committed a crime and should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law.

That said, WikiLeaks is not the end of the world. The fundamentals of U.S. relationships with other nations remain unchanged. Leaks are not going to stop nations from cooperating with the U.S., or for that matter sharing secrets with us. Nations cooperate with the U.S. because it is in their interest to do so. And no leak will stop nations from acting in their self-interest.

But what is in our best interest? This has not been a good month for the Obama Doctrine: The President came home empty-handed from Asia, North Korea fired artillery at South Korea just days after revealing nuclear facilities no one knew they had, and Obama failed to get the G-20 to take any action limiting trade imbalances. It was not supposed to be this way. After apologizing for all of our nation’s sins, the world was supposed to swoon at President Obama’s unparalleled charisma. As American military power withered away, President Obama would use soft power and the United Nations to manage world affairs. But like Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter before him, this progressive foreign policy vision has failed.

That is why it is so important for the Obama Administration to change course on foreign policy. Heritage Foundation Foreign Policy Studies Director James Carafano advises:
The president should dump the New START treaty—its one-sidedness makes the U.S. look like a lousy negotiator in the eyes of the world … and a patsy in the eyes of the Russians. He should also reject out of hand calls to gut the defense budget and just flat out declare that America will stick it out in Iraq and Afghanistan until the job is done. And while he’s at it, he could stand up to China and stop extending the hand of friendship to regimes interested in a world without freedom or America.

The President should also make it a publicly top priority to hunt down any American connected with these leaks and prosecute them. This is not the first WikiLeak. This is, in fact, the third time that WikiLeaks has undermined our nation’s national security, and the Obama Department of Justice has been silent each time. Nobody gets more cooperation than a winner. The Obama Administration can begin to right its foreign policy ship by stopping and successfully prosecuting the WikiLeakers.

[American Patriot]

The following information is published as Open Sources, it does not constitute any endorsement from ISRIA. If titles are sometimes modified for better understanding, the contents are reproduced as delivered by the official institution that first published it. To know the origin of this information, click on 'view original source' at the end of the page.

Foreign affairs specialist wrote Wikileaks' démarche might be "deceptive"

A source sent the following document to us and allowed its release on condition of anonymity. The author has worked in the field of foreign affairs for years. The views expressed in this report are those of the author and not of ISRIA which does not advocate any opinion.

"Wikileaks is a website created by Australian Julian Assange whose purpose is to "run the most powerful intelligence organization in the world". First, I would say, Wikileaks looks like a well-sorted FTP server which unveils data which, for diplomats and policymakers, doesn't come as a surprise at all. Knowing that French President Nicolas Sarkozy could be "touchy" at times or that the U.S. conducted counterterrorist operations in Yemen and allowed President Ali Abdullah Saleh to take credit for it, where's the scoop? Any attentive and lawful access to open sources freely available on the internet combined with good analytic skills are enough to understand, or to assume at least, everything that Wikileaks has "disclosed". But the real point that matters here is twofold:

First, Wikileaks doesn't bring insight into the documents it distributes. It only put thousands of files easily downloadable on a server, and that anyone can read. These documents, if classified, are illegally made available and constitute evidence of a clear breach of law. Strangely enough, such a disclosure mostly, if not only, concerns the United States. So the good question here could be: where are the files from China? from Russia? from any other country apart from the U.S.? Moreover, in what extent does such a disclosure contribute to peace and freedom of information? Indeed, by opting for a quite agressive stance against the U.S., Wikileaks jeopardizes all the "démarche" of western countries which aim at making their diplomacy more transparent and more public. Many efforts in that endeavour were made in recent years, especially on the public diplomacy front.

Second, are you willing to take such information as granted if you don't know the source? Yes, many of those documents were acknowledged as real and authentic by the U.S. government, but no one knows for sure who gave that information to Wikileaks and most importantly: why. Since May 2010, the Pentagon has charged Private First Class (former Specialist) Bradley Manning with "the unauthorized use and disclosure of U.S. classified information." But it seems relevant to wonder about the idea that a low-level intelligence analyst born 1987 could have been able to download such an amount of data without having ever been spotted by the Intelligence Community (IC) before the leak took place? Before reading diplomacy through Wikileaks' eyes, one must wonder about the reliability and the validity of Wikileaks' enterprise. The whole thing may be far more complicated than it appears to be at first sight, if it's not a simple "personal crusade".

What are the interests it serves? Why does it exclusively aim at the U.S.? Who has a real interest in targeting the U.S. in such a hostile way? Do Wikileaks' founders completely control their organization and their sources, upstream and downstream? Do they have any clue of what are only a few governments in the world able to do with a view to damaging rival countries' interests and how sophisticated their hostile plans can be? The answer could be that Wikileaks only had one source, allegedly Bradley Manning, and that as a result, it doesn't have anything else except what that man allegedly downloaded using his U.S. Army computer. It means Wikileaks is no intelligence organization since it would have treated no more than one unique source, a low-level analyst accused of "communicating, transmitting and delivering national defense information to an unauthorized source" by the very same government he was serving.

How could this all be reliable? Hence possibly the explanation for the absence of any files originating outside the U.S. apparatus. As a conclusion, I would stress on the fact that when a diplomat cables something like Chief of the Italian government "Silvio Berlusconi is physically and politically weak", it neither is nor constitutes the official stance of the country he/she works for. Within the diplomatic circles or the IC, there are people who disagree and confront their viewpoints everyday. Sometimes, they are unable to reach any consensus at all. At the end, often after months or years of work, they manage to agree on something that will craft a national stance followed by the executive office of the President. Wikileaks may likely be undertaking deceptive efforts of which the very existence it may never suspect. The truth is what everyone seeks and I would never question the fact that freedom of information is essential. Even if it needs improvement and vigilance, and although it directly participates in the very meaning of what democracy is or should be, prudence is very needed too."

[American Patriot]

Pretty much people are worried about the wrong things.

They are worried about "perceptions" rather than the fact that SOMEONE got all that material and released it

I am finding it extremely improbable that a young Private in the Army had access to all that data. According to what I've heard, he's the "source" and is in jail in solitary confinement.

Granted we have young troops in high places sometimes, I find it completely unbelievable he had access to both highly placed diplomatic emails as well as other data that has been released and attributed to him.

It's bullshit.