Posted on 11/28/2010 3:27:49 PM PST by markomalley
“Traitors. Even if the administration in question is the Obama administration. These scum are still traitors and deserve a traitor’s end.”
Oh come on now. It is not Jesus Christ who decides what needs to be classified and what doesn’t. The people who make these decisions are people who are appointed by Obama and Joe Biden (or whoever the president and vice-president are) to decide what the public gets to see and what it doesn’t get to see. Doesn’t the First Amendment mean anything to you? Or should the government have the absolute right to decide what we can learn about what it is doing or has done?
For instance, if you were editor of the Wall Street Journal and someone came to you with classified information that showed beyond any doubt that Obama had agreed to provide Iran with ten nuclear weapons with the proviso that they could only be used in self-defense, would you feel that you should sit quietly on this information, or would you release it to the public? I say if you refused to inform the citizenry, you would be the traitor. Do you disagree?
Any responsible news organization has to determine the value of the classified information to the citizenry versus the harm caused by publishing it when deciding how to proceed. This is the standard by which they should be judged.
One person who is harmed is Hillary, IMO. The info about her getting US diplomats to spy will not sit well with people if she chooses to run again. It also makes it more dangerous for all US diplomats.
Saudi Arabia is basicly dumping US since they don't trust us any more, and partnering with Russia and China now instead... building refineries in China, etc.
I seriously doubt anyone is going to do that.
My sleeping habits are irrelevant to the discussion...
The leaked information has been widely disseminated, by the New York Times as well as numerous other outlets. At this point, much of it has either been posted or linked here on Free Republic.
So what? Are you suggesting this somehow exonerates the NYT? Even if you declared Free Republic and its members evil and culpable in their handling of the information -two wrongs make not a right... Nor does one that commits evil negate one iota truth simply because he or she speaks it...
As appalled as we may be that this has been done, we have become willing participants by reading and commenting. We, Free Republic and its members, are spreading the information, just like the Times did.
Get off your self anointed spokesperson for humanity soapbox -stop speaking for "we" -speak for yourself...
Perhaps you are right in suggesting that this is not hypocrisy. Perhaps, in helping disseminate this material and thus failing to live up to the virtue that we demand of others, we are inwardly struggling to be better than those whom we criticize.
Your violin playing rings off key -again, speak for yourself.
Maybe I should have just suggested you go to DU where they wax ever so eloquently in support of many moral relative concepts that support whatever agenda they push...
But I doubt it.
I did not request a meaningless philosophical dissertation -- how about just answering the simple question posted to you earlier -- What do you disagree with that "Free Republic" and it's members are doing?
They are located in the US, owned and run by Americans. Assuage, or whatever, is not an American. It makes a difference.
It could also be part of an attempted coup. I have wondered for 2 years that it often seems someone/something is trying to destroy Obama from within.
Before God we are ALL sinners -as such all men that spread, preach, attempt to live by the word are at one time or another -maybe even always hypocrites
NOW think about it -what does an accusation of hypocrisy do? NOTHING other than attack the man. IT does not pertain to truth at all does it...
NOW why do you think attacking FR somehow lets NYT off the hook?
But even the Democrats aren't happy with Bo etc. They tried to ditch Pelosi and should have been able to do that with no problem...one wonders the degree of power she really has in Washington. I am certain she has bought off the opposition to her one way or another. It often appears she has more power than Obama, that he moves to the crack of her whip.
“Isn’t it rather hypocritical to lambast the Times for publishing this material when we’re all reading it here on Free Republic as well?”
Depends. Has the New York Times been cooperating actively with WikiLeaks ahead of publication to disseminate this information as widely as possible?
I believe that they have, so the comparison isn´t very good. Of course, if I am misinformed, your point stands.
As the information seems to be mostly of the “damaging to Obama and / or Hillary” kind, this is also a good spot for conservatives to take a principled stand on the issue of leaking classified information.
While this story is steaming along in one hand, you better watch what is going on with the other hand. May be just an elaborate diversion. Should we trust anyone anymore? It might be time to read the back pages for a while.
This could mean the start of a government grab for “evil” websites. Public outrage over this story may end up sanctioning a severe attack on the free speech of the web. Beware.
Killed a third bird too — the future of the Democrat party. With no viable successor to a one term Obama, the 40 years of Democrats that the cognoscenti were hoping for could easily become 40 years of Republicans (not that I’m complaining).
Er... God?
NYT: Stop posturing! If it does damage to America you would print it, no matter what.
Maybe we shouldn't kill the messenger (in this case) but, cherish the glimpse into the evil revealed.
We should kill the messenger. If he survives he will continue his anti American actions on another day.
I still cannot understand why/how she retains her leadership position amongst the Democrats in the House, after the “shellacking” the Dems took in the election. What’s the logic/rationale behind that?
Pelosi has got the goods on Obama and she either retains the power she wants or she lets out everything she knows.
You can seriously doubt all you want.Assange is a dead man because the release of the names of Afghani informants will cause the the death of the informants at the hands of the Taliban. Additionally the Taliban will not only kill the informants, but the Taliban will also wipe out the informants families.
Like I said, Assange in now within the venue of espionage, and the consequence will be his assassination at the hands of those Afghanis whose families have been erradicated by Assanges release of thier names in these documents.
You can carve this prediction in stone, and I will send you a quater so you can call me in a year. At that point Assange will be dead as a door nail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.