The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Wikileaks [MERGED]

rareboy

rareboy

coleos patentes
50K Posts
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Posts
121,294
Reaction score
32,720
Points
113
So Wikileaks posts 200,000 pages in 92,000 documents chronicling the Afghanistan War and not a peep on this board?

Granted, they're no Pentagon papers, which chillingly detailed how the US manufactured the war in Vietnam, but some pretty interesting facts nonetheless.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of it is how easy it is for one of the 850,000 people with 'Secret' clearance in the US to lip-synch Lady Gaga while downloading military records at work. And the Facebook effect where nothing is secret anymore.
 
Re: Wikileaks

rareboy said:
So Wikileaks posts 200,000 pages in 92,000 documents chronicling the Afghanistan War and not a peep on this board?

Granted, they're no Pentagon papers, which chillingly detailed how the US manufactured the war in Vietnam, but some pretty interesting facts nonetheless.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of it is how easy it is for one of the 850,000 people with 'Secret' clearance in the US to lip-synch Lady Gaga while downloading military records at work. And the Facebook effect where nothing is secret anymore.
Click to expand...


What can they say?

Check out the media pundits. CNN, FOX, MSNBC, their guests. Neocons are saying it's no big deal and ObamaDems are saying it's no big deal. Obama same as Bush; protectors and defenders follow where their Leader and the media manipulates them.



Jon Stewart, OTOH, gets it:

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/ite...hdig+Truthdig:+Drilling+Beneath+the+Headlines



But good on you for starting a thread about it.
 
Re: Wikileaks

sure, no big deal. and that's why they are so vigorously trying to find the leak and trying to shut down and discredit wikileaks for some time now.

if that's not such a big deal, and everything known already, why wasn't it public to begin with?
 
Re: Wikileaks

Corny said:
sure, no big deal. and that's why they are so vigorously trying to find the leak and trying to shut down and discredit wikileaks for some time now.

if that's not such a big deal, and everything known already, why wasn't it public to begin with?
Click to expand...


Remember Daniel Ellsberg, leaked the Pentagon Papers during the Viet Nam era? He was on Larry King the other night and was asked to comment on a clip of press secretary Robert Gibbs complaining about the leaks:
KING: Daniel, do you understand why Mr. Gibbs, representing the president, is so upset?

ELLSBERG: Well, he's very upset in part because he's working for a president who has indicted more people now for leaks than all previous presidents put together. And two of those people -- Thomas Drake and Shamai Leibowitz -- have been indicted for acts that were undertaken under Bush, which [the] George W. Bush administration chose not to indict.

So this is an administration that's more concerned about preventing transparency, I would say, than its predecessor which I'm very sorry to hear.

http://www.ellsberg.net/archive/daniel-ellsberg-larry-king
​
 
Re: Wikileaks

Corny said:
sure, no big deal. and that's why they are so vigorously trying to find the leak and trying to shut down and discredit wikileaks for some time now.

if that's not such a big deal, and everything known already, why wasn't it public to begin with?
Click to expand...

thanks corny

I think people are hesitant in america right now to talk about this openily in forums, blogs and on television for two reasons...

one... the nation is losing its interest in continuing the afganistan war

two.... the nation is deeply concerned that further attention to the topic could cause harm to the people that have been revealed in the documents to be collaborators with america.

IMO there is a collective breath held here...this is a bipartisan issue, not about one presidency, since the war has spanned two presidencies from two parties and two eras of controll of congress by two parties.

you can't pin this on anyone BUT the people who did it, and I would guess when we find the guy that leaked these classified military documents, his courtmartial will be very public and cause a huge debate.

right now, the public is waiting to see if the leaks are going to sway the war and the war effort.

out first concern is for human life and in particular the lives of the soldiers.
 
Re: Wikileaks

Corny said:
that's probably why the friendly kills of the canadian soldiers have been credited to taliban?

or is that why there are so many dead civilians that were never mentioned?

seriously you need to read the logs. i recommend the guardian, imho they did the best job in making them accessible.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/series/afghanistan-the-war-logs
Click to expand...

americans have a history of thinking that only american lives are "human lives"

the one thing that personally bothers me that the congress and the department of defence will have to answer is why civillian deaths that americans caused were denied AND deaths of our allies in the battle feild, when they were clearly aware that they were responsible of them

it is not conduct becoming the standards we as civilians set for our military. the Comander in cheif is a civilian for that exact reason, to make them tell the truth, and that hasn't happened for either political paarty.

this can't be spun within america as a partisan issue. it has complete national shame on it, and it exposes what engaging in endless war makes a nation do.

this cilp was the one that disturbs me...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-civilian-deaths-rules-engagement

americans need to claim ownership of this mess as individuals and they are just too ashamed to speak up about it.

I considered making a thread about this, but I knew it would descend into which side was more responsible.

the truth is, that all americans are responsible, every living breathing one of us, and it is our responsibility to do something about it.

thanks again.
 
Re: Wikileaks

By the way, let me be clear that I think the Canadian military have suppressed a lot of information that would have the Canadian people less than happy about the fog of war.

We had the whole 'handing prisoners over to the Afghani's to be tortured debacle' so it would be interesting to see what is in the thousands of redacted passages that the people who are paying for this war aren't allowed to see.
 
Re: Wikileaks

](*,)](*,)

they out to drag them into court and hold them responsibile for any soldier's or civilians
lives that are lost for any names they published.

eM](*,)
 
Re: Wikileaks

Corny said:
that's probably why the friendly kills of the canadian soldiers have been credited to taliban?

or is that why there are so many dead civilians that were never mentioned?

seriously you need to read the logs. i recommend the guardian, imho they did the best job in making them accessible.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/series/afghanistan-the-war-logs
Click to expand...

Here's the problem though; those are daily logs, many of which are written by relatively low-ranked officers. I can't recall where at the moment, but a news source actually analyzed some of the more serious claims made in them about certain events, and found that the logs often-times exaggerated or just made things up. (because many of them are based off of second hand knowledge, etc.) I've no doubt a large chunk of them are real, but the type of documents leaked aren't exactly definitive portraits of what was actually happening on the ground.
 
Re: Wikileaks

others would say that the thoughts and observation of the "common" soldiers portrait best what's going on ..
 
Re: Wikileaks

BostonPirate said:
thanks corny

I think people are hesitant in america right now to talk about this openily in forums, blogs and on television for two reasons...

one... the nation is losing its interest in continuing the afganistan war

two.... the nation is deeply concerned that further attention to the topic could cause harm to the people that have been revealed in the documents to be collaborators with america.

IMO there is a collective breath held here...this is a bipartisan issue, not about one presidency, since the war has spanned two presidencies from two parties and two eras of controll of congress by two parties.

you can't pin this on anyone BUT the people who did it, and I would guess when we find the guy that leaked these classified military documents, his courtmartial will be very public and cause a huge debate.

right now, the public is waiting to see if the leaks are going to sway the war and the war effort.

out first concern is for human life and in particular the lives of the soldiers.
Click to expand...

:=D::=D::=D::=D::=D::=D::=D:
 
Re: Wikileaks

Corny said:
oh by the way .. this just in:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/wikileaks-insurance-file/

clever move ..
Click to expand...

Its not clever. Its using information that could risk the lives of americans and Iraqis (or perhaps Afghans, depending on whats actually in the file) as blackmail to prevent Wikileaks from being held responsible for its actions. Revealing some information is fine. But using information in this way is absolutely irresponsible and indefensible.
 
Re: Wikileaks

no big deal anymore.
The death around the world (natural or man made) numb our feelings.
 
Re: Wikileaks

JB3 said:
Its not clever.
Click to expand...
it is. it is a life insurance.

Its using information that could risk the lives of americans and Iraqis (or perhaps Afghans, depending on whats actually in the file) as blackmail to prevent Wikileaks from being held responsible for its actions. Revealing some information is fine. But using information in this way is absolutely irresponsible and indefensible.
Click to expand...

you have no clue what is in there, so your point is moot. wikileaks is on the safe side with their operations, the only way that they can get them is by unlawful moves from the US. and after a couple of other abductions and the likes we do know that the US won't care a bit about it, so this is their insurance.
 
Re: Wikileaks

Here's a good talk about Wikileaks at TED

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNOnvp5t7Do[/ame]
 
Re: Wikileaks

How is he creepy? I don't get it. It looks like he is interested in government accountability. In free countries aren't we supposed to know what government does in our names? How wars are fought in our names? Just what our taxes are spent on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top