Posted on 01/31/2011 3:16:23 PM PST by sunmars
It wasn’t happy hour when I wrote that but boy it is now.
I’m just as pissed at the Brits as you are and don’t get me started about the White House, etc.... I’m just trying to make the point that there has to be a certain level of secrecy to international relations.
If they’re is to be no penalty for revealing or transmitting secret information than there is no limit to what can be revealed. You can’t cherry pick.
Obama has been happy to allow the leaks that serve his leftist agenda to cut and run in the war on terror. Myself, I’d like to see every last radical muslim burned in hellfire. I don’t think these leaks are advancing that.
Why is this so complicated for you?
You appear to be both rude, and dense. I have never admired Assange personally here. But some of us can be intelligent enough to discern the difference between seeing Asange as a “hero”, and thinking governments are using secrecy mostly for the good cause.
Anyway, you are apparently incapable of polite debate. I notice you still have said nothing to advance your cause. You only screech and call people names. You need to quit being so naive in your blind love of secrecy. *(and this does not mean you have to be an Assange fan)
Lighten up Francis.
Are you crazed? He was on your side!!!! LOL
Are you crazed? He was on your side!!!! LOL
Ok, i agree with you. That post i can agree with 100%.
It is a difficult question. If secrecy is absolute, it seems to be widely abused. Yet, it is sometimes crucial.
I guess it comes down to trust in government, and in governments being radical in their sticking to working on our behalf.
I personally am coming to belive than we probably use more secrecy to cover corruption such as Copenhagen,, global warming, etc, than we do for legitimate reasons.
And also, military secrecy,,,,Yes, ill go sacrosanct there. Diplomatic,, less so. They have an extremely poor track record of working FOR America. They bear very close watching.
Are you crazed? He was on your side!!!! LOL
No stupid, he is not on my "side", he's your pimply faced roommate. Try again......
OK, DR. Looking through your posts I can see you are rightfully enraged at the British weasels who sold out the Lockerbie victims, many of whom where their own citizens. And the current US administration was clearly complicit in this nasty deal.
I couldn’t agree more and am glad the info is out.
I just can’t agree with the method and I think the worst is yet to come.
By the way, by some strange coincidence, I broke a crown while I was reading your second to last post. I’ll be thinking of you while I’m in the dentist’s chair.
If our "administration" was involved, I can't help but think George Soros was involved as well. Where there's big money to be had, he's never far away.
Keep repeating:
1. TWA800 crashed because of a spontaneous center fuel tank explosion.
2. OkBomb was executed completely by 2 army buddies —there were no Middle East sponsors.
‘We like the leaks that serve our cause.”
As Rush said, where’s the leaks showing WMD’s in Iraq, and their moving to Libya, etc. etc. etc....
You have confirmed my worst suspicions—that the so called “west” is totally bankrupt financially but more significantly morally. It has become a cesspit of vileness and illusion.
We are -ladies and gentlemen- subservient to the beasts of the world.
UK has been on our side even in Iraq. Blair is essentially on trial as a ‘war criminal’ because of that, so I’ll give UK the benefit of doubt until I know more.
“That is so corrupt!” (Meadow Soprano)
From my POV, Assange should be executed IF any of those Afghans named and listed in his “released” files are murdered for aiding us. Let’s face it, there is little in these ‘revelations’ that we didn’t already know or suspect-What troubles me is that some seem to think these tidbits of info are potentially worth peoples lives.
Tip 1:
Wait for Dem controlled WH.
Same tip used In Iran, Turkey and Egypt.
Ministers secretly advised Muammar Gaddafi’s Libyan regime how to secure the successful early release of the Lockerbie bomber, documents obtained by The Daily Telegraph have disclosed.
A Foreign Office minister sent Libyan officials detailed legal advice on how to use Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s cancer diagnosis to ensure he was released from a Scottish prison on compassionate grounds...
Thanks, nutmeg!
IIRC, Obama approved.
I know that if I’m not remembering it right, someone will correct me.
It's not the US vs Britain. Its conservatives in the US and Britain vs "progressives" in the US and Britain. Don't let them split you off from us by trying to say otherwise.
Yes ok, but the problem is that these leaks are SELECTIVE. Truth has to be interpreted, but how can you do that when you only have one lot of documents? So, for example, Wikileaks releases a document from Hilary Clinton advising US diplomats to spy on other nations at the UN. Everyone goes “oooh...naughty rights-trampling Americans!” But, for all we know, the diplomats might have sent messages back (that wikileaks doesn’t have) saying “No can do, Hitlery. That’s illegal”. You might think that’s unlikely, but it could have happened. We don’t know. More likely, EVERY government instructs its representatives to do some dirty dealing at the UN, but because the US is the only one Wikileaks has named, they are the only ones who get the mud thrown at them.
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.