Clinton talks to China about Wikileaks release

Originally posted by NoAngel2u
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

Brilliant comparative illustration! Kudos!

Brilliant, indeed.

I'm still having chicken nuggets for lunch right now.

reply to post by XxRagingxPandaxX


You can disagree all you want, doesn't change the fact that this practice is ILLEGAL. I posted articles to reference that a few posts up maybe you missed it but you should read them so you can fully understand why this practice is illegal and why it's fishy that this guy is still running around.

reply to post by NoJoker13
Okay it may be illegal, but so was a lot of good things,slaves running away in the south, women voting etc. It is kind of fishy he's still running around yes, but the fact the U.S. is apologizing or what not ahead of time means wiki leaks isn't lying!

reply to post by XxRagingxPandaxX


Ok I can agree some good things come out of illegal practice but I would like you to take a step back and wonder what exactly everyone has to gain here, I'll state some reasons.
1. Clearly if this was going to damage our government they wouldn't allow the MSM to get wind they were worried about it.
2. Julian may be what you all think he is, a good person trying to open the eyes of the masses of sheep in the world, but the law of averages would tell me this guy is probably a pawn in a much more elaborate scheme and that he isn't as "good" as everyone thinks.
3. Julian has been allowed to run around for quite sometime... again fishy, like you said our government commits illegal practice and therefor if this man was damaging to them he would be dead, like the countless other martyrs that have come and gone over the ages.
4. Dorky, Computer Geek, again EXTREMELY unassuming.
5. How do we even know this is the "actual" information it is being advertised to be?
6. Our government doesn't allow anything to go on unless in the long run it will benefit and give reason to the actions they will commit in the future... Such as if these documents lead to another war in say... Syria would you be the least bit surprised? I wouldn't.

I'm just saying we here at ATS usually are very suspicious and sceptical of everyone's motives, so why is that Julian hasn't been questioned? Could it be the government has found the greatest pawn of all time? Someone the current population can sympathize and also relate too? Hmmmm I wonder.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Wrong, as someone with clearance your duty is to not reveal information to sources without the proper clearance.

Either you're a person of integrity or you're not. Secondly, I was speaking mostly about the Iraq War release of information, that had the potential to put soldier's lives at risk. I'll never support that as a former military person. And lastly, like I said, theft is theft, I'll never support it.

A person of integrity, does not condone, nor help keep secret acts lacking integrity. If you are someone who does, then you do not have integrity.

The information was not stolen by Wikileaks, it was forwarded to them. Your beating the drum of wrongdoing because you want to help perpetuate the notion that we need to protect the wrongdoers/doing of our government and others makes you a wrongdoer. lol If you align yourself with those lacking integrity, you therefore lack integrity yourself.

How many more ways can I say that by your very act of supporting those doing wrong, and condemning those doing right, makes you wrong?

reply to post by NoJoker13
everything in your post I agree with, i'd say the reason he isn't being questioned that much is because a lot of people on ats are skeptical of the government and so is he, so they consider him kind of an idol. A lot of people on ats talk about how bad the government is but what do they do about it? Nothing! Well this man whatever motives it may be for has done just that, taken a stand, something a lot of people on ats won't do. So thats my opinion on why he's not questioned or critisised much on ats.

Originally posted by XxRagingxPandaxX
For one I can't really get offended by the straw man comment because I don't really know what it means

lol luv it I'm sure you can find an explanation on google eh? lol Thanks for the lol

As a followup, FOX News just reported that Hillary Clinton has been calling the heads of states of the major governments of the world to "warn" them of the about to be released content of the documents from Wikileaks. Something is afoot. More information, less secrecy can not be a bad thing, We should all view the information as suspect. But, we should all view it and make our own determination. It is the American way.

reply to post by NoAngel2u
I do what I can!

reply to post by XxRagingxPandaxX


That's my point Panda, I think the government has taken an interest in the amount of conspiracy theorists that have emerged over the past 10 years. They're not only losing the battle with citizens at the moment; government approval has been way down for a while, their getting butchered. So therefor they must find another spokesperson. Someone who likes computers, likes conspiracies, and seems to be taking a stand against the same things we find so brutal and horrific. He's just like you and me, what better person to transmit false information through then exactly that type of man or to transmit certain information through to further the USA and it's allies endeavors. Although Julian seems like "the saint to open everyone's eyes", in the end he'll probable be more known as "the man that tricked the world". Hopefully the latter isn't the case but from where I'm sitting it just seems to damn fishy.

I know what it is, my top secret buddy that flies by and whispers in my ears told me that Aliens Are Coming!! :O

Hehe nah, j.k. maybe :-|

I hope whatever it is doesn't cause every nation of the world to drop nukes on me though :-(

I'm all for free speech and freedom of information, though this time I'm wondering what the releasing of certain information by Wikileaks is going to cost us all in the long run. It might at the very least mean tighter control by governments on how the net is used, all the way up to a total ban on public use altogether. I'd hate to have those talking heads on television news stations as my only sources concerning what's happening in the world, nor would I fully trust any major newspaper or magazine. On the other hand, as with most folk out there, I'd like to know what this latest info that Wikileaks has is all about. Whatever it is, it sure has TPTB running scared, and it's my personal feeling that it's proof that all wars have been and still are their main source of income. To them the world is like a chessboard, with countries being the pieces. In this game however, winners and losers are decided in advance.

A post to everyone!

I think the government has taken an interest in the amount of conspiracy theorists that have emerged over the past 10 years. They're not only losing the battle with citizens at the moment; government approval has been way down for a while, their getting butchered. So therefor they must find another spokesperson. Someone who likes computers, likes conspiracies, and seems to be taking a stand against the same things we find so brutal and horrific. He's just like you and me, what better person to transmit false information through then exactly that type of man or to transmit certain information through to further the USA and it's allies endeavors. Although Julian seems like "the saint to open everyone's eyes", in the end he'll probable be more known as "the man that tricked the world". Hopefully the latter isn't the case but from where I'm sitting it just seems to damn fishy.

Reposted because the original post was just to a certain member.

reply to post by Bkrmn
well said, and us citizens are the pawns.

Originally posted by Bkrmn
I'm all for free speech and freedom of information, though this time I'm wondering what the releasing of certain information by Wikileaks is going to cost us all in the long run. It might at the very least mean tighter control by governments on how the net is used, all the way up to a total ban on public use altogether. I'd hate to have those talking heads on television news stations as my only sources concerning what's happening in the world, nor would I fully trust any major newspaper or magazine. On the other hand, as with most folk out there, I'd like to know what this latest info that Wikileaks has is all about. Whatever it is, it sure has TPTB running scared, and it's my personal feeling that it's proof that all wars have been and still are their main source of income. To them the world is like a chessboard, with countries being the pieces. In this game however, winners and losers are decided in advance.

You are correct.

War is just about the elite making money by the sacrifice of fools willing to "buy in" to the false patriotism con that you will be fighting for freedom. The very government they are fighting for then takes our freedoms away.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Good question?

I do not think its as seems like you imply too.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by windwaker

 

Well Clinton is talking to China about this release. They obviously had to send Clinton to talk to Chinese leaders. I'm sure he didn't decide to do it himself. So they must be worried about Chinese reaction.

Clinton is a she, not a he..As in Hilary, and they didn't send her.
She simply used a phone..

Yeah, I realized that I made that gender mistake, but I didn't edit the post. Let's just call her/them "Billary Clinton". LOL

Incorrect

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Stop with the straw men arguments. This is Treason:

Releasing classified information to unvetted sources without the proper clearance.

It's punishable by death penalty.

There are procedures and proper channels for the release of sensitive information and they should be followed. I'm especially perturbed about the release of military secrets, that has the potential to put real soldier's lives at risk. I'll never support that.

This is treason:

§ 2381. Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Cornell University Law School
I think it could be argued that even Bradley is not guilty of treason. He did not levy war, he did not adhere to enemies. (don't recall wikileaks, nor Julian Assange being considered enemies of US "before" all the leaks), and he did not give aid, nor comfort to enemies. He may be guilty of something else, but I think it could be argued fairly that it's not treason.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Or maybe it's just the release of various every day cables from one country to another that usually involves some sensitive data. I've lost a lot of faith in Wikileaks, much of what they have provided lately is far less incriminating than their old stuff and more importantly they seem to be focused on the wars stuff and they have forgotten much of the corporate exposure they used to throw out. They managed to cause major trouble for a number of banks with their releases but this sort of stuff has been less important to them it seems.