Originally Posted By ecdc >>Assange's leaking of information has undoubtedly caused many deaths and will continue to do so in the future.<< Examples?
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >Those who initially leak the information< You realize that ALL governments do exactly what he did...right?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I've heard a couple of interesting analyses that point out that this kind of thing would not have been possible before 9/11, for two reasons: 1). So much more is classified as "secret" now. The Bush admin. went hog wild classifying as "secret" things that in the past were not considered as such (and indeed, much of what has been leaked so far seems rather unremarkable). This is a problem because when everything is "secret," it becomes harder to differentiate what's really important and there gets to be more wheat to separate from the chaff. 2). There was much understandable handwringing about how our intelligence couldn't work together and share information pre-9/11, and so couldn't "connect the dots." So sharing intelligence between agencies was made easier, and lower-level people were given access on the theory that someone might spot something and pass it on to someone else at another agency who could then connect the dots. It was formerly inconceivable that a private (!) could have had access to some of this material, but that's who the leaker is, after all.
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >much of what has been leaked so far seems rather unremarkable< Most of what was leaked was on the lowest end of security, and had already been viewed by thousands of people working for the government.
Originally Posted By ecdc That's what I'm trying to figure out. What exactly has been leaked that's caused deaths and otherwise led to such upheaval that it warrants the death penalty?
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >I think this falls under just because you can doesn't mean you should.< I wasn't aware the penalty for doing that was now death.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think the death penalty talk was because some of the earlier leaks were thought to put troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in increased danger. Robert Gates and Hilary Clinton in particular were concerned about that in anticipation of one of the data dumps.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Funny how those here who are calling for Assange's head on a platter, failed to display the same level of outrage for the outing of Valerie Plame. Which, in case you all forgot, was a freakin' FELONY! Why is what Assange did so terrible, yet what Karl Rove did so benign?
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<I've never known anyone before who intentionally devoted his life to being a prick.>> You really need to learn more about Karl Rove. He's the one who should be behind bars, more so than Assange. What Rove did to Valerie Plame was far worse than this gossipy TMZ-like crap that WikiLeaks puts up. You Republicans always have plenty of excuses to overlook the illegal and immoral garbage that Rove and others in the Bush administration engaged in. You always give conservatives a free pass. But progressives are always held to the standards of perfection and saintly behavior. The hypocrisy is astounding. If Assange was airing dirty laundry on the progressives instead of the conservatives, you'd be ignoring him as much as you ignore Rove. Focusing on Assange just isn't worth the effort. I'd rather see Rove and Cheney and W behind bars for war crimes than Mr. WikiLeaks.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Thanks for letting me know I'm a conservative. Who knew? It would surprise the hell out of whoever counted my straight-D ticket on November 2. I can be a Democrat and still call foul when I see it.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Blanche Lincoln and Ben Nelson are also Dems. But you'd never know it from their behavior. The RINO/DINO gate swings both ways. Assange is not worth all this energy folks are giving him. This WikiLeaks crap is basically years-old gossip that doesn't really matter one way or the other. Everything now is labeled "SECRET" to the point that the term has become meaningless. It's just not that big of a deal. But Valerie Plame was working on the ground in the real world trying to round up loose nukes. Her operatives in other countries were put at great risk when she was outed. Even Papa Bush was appalled at the insensitivity of Rove's revenge against Joe Wilson. And don't get me started on Junior's public admission about waterboarding and how he would authorize it again if given the chance. Where's the outrage over that? Assange isn't worth the energy. But going after Team W for war crimes should have never been taken off the table.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Funny how those here who are calling for Assange's head on a platter, failed to display the same level of outrage for the outing of Valerie Plame. Which, in case you all forgot, was a freakin' FELONY! Why is what Assange did so terrible, yet what Karl Rove did so benign?" Where do you get this? Many people here were outraged at the Plame outing. No one ever said what Rove/Cheney/Armitage did was benign.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I was mostly referring to the right wing spin machine, who are literally calling for Assange's execution. But I was also referring to the usual suspects on WE who gave a free pass to just about everything the Bush administration did. They know who they are.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I have to say, the more I think about this, the more I really don't like Assange. Something about him just doesn't pass the proverbial smell test. While we should prosecute those who leaked the information, normally the law doesn't go lightly either on those who traffic in stolen goods, and that's what he's doing here. More and more, I get a sense this guyhas his own agenda, and he doesn't care one whit about any collateral damage he might cause, whether it's damage to the reputation of others, damage to relations between countries, or even the loss of life. I don't think the guy cares. Someone asked earlier if states should aways shelter some secrets. I think the answer's an unequivocal yes. To paraphrase Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men, the general public couldn't handle the truth about some things that happen. I fail to see what makes Assange the arbiter of what becomes public, and potentially who gets to live and who gets to die. To that end, I can completely understand why some people here would just as soon see the guy dead.
