Originally Posted By skinnerbox << don't think Rush or Beck need America's corporate world to be successful.>> You miss the point. Rush and Beck and Fox News types need corporations to be RICH. They can have listeners all across the country, but they're not the ones giving them hundreds of millions of dollars for spewing their lies and hatred. The corporations who pay these media pundits are the ones who've made them rich. And those are the masters whom Rush and Beck and the others all serve. They all know which side their bread is buttered on, and it's not the side of their working poor mid-American listeners.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I have never listened to either Rush or Beck. I just think Assange is incredibly dangerous and out of control. There clearly is no line that he will not cross. You are really hung up on the whole Bush administration thing. I don't remember many people here defending Bush. As for outing Plame, that was ONE agent. It nowhere approaches the scope of what Assange is doing.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I've made a point of actively tuning out Beck and Limbaugh and most of those clowns for some time now, purely as a blood pressure stabilization effort. Their dumber remarks still make news, of course, but generally, but their daily gibberish is not on my radar. So that absolutely have no influence on how I interpret a story like this WikiLeaks thing. I just read an AP article about these latest links, and honestly I do not understand what in the world is to be gained for the average person by leaking the location of now formerly secret vaccine labs and pipelines and such. It sure doesn't seem to be "progressive" in any way that I recognize. It seems destructive and yet another needless security headache right when we don't need another one. In short, it doesn't help most people sleep better at night knowing we're just that wee little bit less safe than we were before this stuff was dumped out there.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<You are really hung up on the whole Bush administration thing. I don't remember many people here defending Bush.>> Are you kidding me? As 2oony pointed out, most of them have left. But during the Bush years, they were the loudest voices on the boards. There were far more pro-Bush supporters in WE than progressives. I remember it well. As for outing Plame being smaller in scope than what Assange is doing... YMMV. I don't think what Assange is doing is as horrendous as you and others believe. Most of this stuff is State Dept gossip. Big deal. Some of it is juicy, but I don't see 98% of it as being the big security problem that you all do. Sorry, but that's just the way I see it.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Do you really think that Rush and Beck NEED the money and that they are influenced so significantly by big business? I'm not a fan or a foe of Beck and Rush. But, I don't think that in the least. I think they do it mostly to stroke their egos. They both have plenty of money. If this knucklehead with Wikileaks has nothing to hide...why is his lawyer speaking for him and where is he?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Daniel Ellsberg exposed corruption and illegal activity conducted by the Nixon administration.>> You have an obsession with Republicans that borders on paranoia. Surely you know that the Pentagon Papers were NOT only about the Nixon administration. They also document lies told to the American people about Vietnam by the Truman, Kennedy and Johnson administrations. In fact Johnson lied more to the American people about Vietnam than all the other presidents combined. Yet who do you talk about? Nixon. Apparently in your mind no Republican can do good; no Democrat can do evil.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<I believe Assange does have information that the rest of us should see, that throws serious light on corruption and illegal activity which major corporate players and GOP politicians have conducted.>> What makes you so sure of this? If he really does have information that is vital to exposing some secret corruption, why keep it secret? Why wouldn't he release that information? Instead, we see him releasing information on pipelines, labs, etc that could actually be used to hurt and attack the American people. I've defended this guy before, but with this latest release of info, I'm having second thoughts about his motives. If he truly has information that needs to be shared, whether about governments or corporations, why is he waiting to share it?
Originally Posted By wahooskipper He needs some collateral now and this might just keep him out of jail.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<He needs some collateral now and this might just keep him out of jail.>> I hadn't thought of that, but you could be right. Not that "we the people" will ever find out for sure, of course!
Originally Posted By ecdc I've defended Assange and will continue to do so depending on the circumstances, but I also fail to see how the latest leak is essential to keeping our elected officials honest or exposing corruption. I hate to see WikiLeaks shutdown by government pressure, but at some point he brings it on himself. If he was truly exposing corruption, then certainly groups and governments somewhere would be sympathetic to his cause. Now even the Swiss won't keep his bank open. They'd keep Skeletor's bank account open, for crying out loud. Skinner, I loves ya, but I think you're reaching with the Ellsberg comparison.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Skinner, I loves ya, but I think you're reaching with the Ellsberg comparison.>> I like Skinner, he's silly.
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >Why wouldn't he release that information?< Because releasing or wanting to release information like that normally gets you killed.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Apparently in your mind no Republican can do good; no Democrat can do evil.>> I don't believe that at all. But in this particular case, Nixon was the tipping point. It was his administration that tried to discredit Dr. Ellsberg by the Gordon Liddy break-in of his therapist's office. The dirty tricks team of Liddy's went after Democrats and anti-war protestors, all at the behest of Nixon. What Assange is doing is not as bad as so many here are making it out to be. Some real dirt might turn up in the future. But what's materialized so far is nothing but diplomatic gossip.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I didn't read this level of animosity for the Bush White House when Valerie Plame was outed several years back. So why Assange? What's really behind the vitriol? It ain't rational." That's twice this has been said now and twice it's been incredibly wrong.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox OK, I capitulate. The folks who are still here on WE weren't the ones who stayed silent and tacitly defended the Bush White House when Plame was outed. Those posters are gone now. Is that better?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "OK, I capitulate. The folks who are still here on WE weren't the ones who stayed silent and tacitly defended the Bush White House when Plame was outed. Those posters are gone now. Is that better?" No, just a bad DAR imitation.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder As long as we're at it, I don't recall you being here at all during the Plame/Bush/Cheney crapfest, unless you lurked or posted under a different name.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<As long as we're at it, I don't recall you being here at all during the Plame/Bush/Cheney crapfest, unless you lurked or posted under a different name.>> Different name.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox And I was trying to be sincere with the capitulation. I realize that most of the posters who sided with Bush at every turn are now gone. But there are a few that still remain. Very few, yes. But they are still here. I just don't understand the need to vilify this guy. He's simply not worth the effort. And if he is sitting on info similar in nature to the importance of what Ellsberg released, then I hope he gets the chance to publish it before the governments around the globe shut him down permanently.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I don't equate Assange at all with any kind person with a pure motive such as a muckraking journalist or even a local gadfly trying to keep a city council honest. I think it is eminently possible he's got his own agenda, has worked assiduously to develop weak links in the information pipeline. no matter what level, and pays for his information. Why now? Why do all this? What with all the other problems facing the world, why inject himself like this, especially with this latest threat? What makes him any different than a terrorist? In my old line of work, we had a saying. A man with a briefcase can steak more money than a man with a gun. I think that's Assange.
