US Govt Silencing Wikileaks??

The US government and even more so, the military would have definitely said something if they were falsified documents...

I find it hilarious that you accuse people of believing whatever they want, and you're only proof that it isn't true, is that it's on the Internet.

 

I find it hilarious that you, only a week after much of America branded an upstanding public servant as a racist based on an edited version of one of her speeches, would rush to judgment, again.

I also find it pretty funny that you would accuse me of something I did not say, which is only a few posts above or below this one. My exact words were: "Does anyone here have any evidence that the documents posted on Wikileaks are truth? Or, do you just believe it because you want to?" How do you get me making an accusation by asking a question?

btw...the U.S. government will neither confirm nor deny documents that contain classified information that could put our troops in more danger than they already are. As a Veteran of the U.S. military I find it pretty callous that anyone would applaud giving our combat enemies classified information.

.

 

fuck your combat enemies u dusty old bitch

 

??

Based on tone and context. The second question seems rhetorical; I apologize if I was wrong.

The US Government already confirmed them by their response that the leaked documents are dangerous and irrelevant.

 

The US military has declared it to be true, but I guess they could be lying. Anything is possible.

 

It was a question not a statement. Perhaps a daft question. Please ask how the OP feels about the question now.

 

You know they won't say what is true or false. You know not all of it is false. If you think some of it puts lives at risk, fair enough.

 

eventually. so what. That's not the point is it.

Daniel Ellsberg of pentagon papers fame certainly thinks that Julian Assange may be facing abit.

 

google "Shirley Sherrod" . A premature rush to judgment here smeared a good woman's reputation and left some people in high places with egg covered faces.

"Based on" and "seems" are subjective; but, sometimes it's difficult to express one's thoughts accurately in writing, especially in an emotionally charged conversation. I'll try a little harder to make myself a little clearer.

They confirmed that these are government documents that are classified. U.S, policy on these matters is to neither confirm nor deny the accuracy of the content. All documents relating to war and national security are classified as a matter of course for obvious reasons.

Last night's news circuit seems to suggest that at least most of these incidents have already been reported by the press and the documents are "raw" investigative data" containing eye witness accounts which are the most unreliable evidence, and information given by paid informants, even more unreliable.

Posting these documents in their entirety has done nothing to further any cause other than that of Wikileaks. The general public has no means of determining the accuracy of the information in these documents or their relevance in the scheme of this war. All this has accomplished is to make the waters muddier, and possibly bloodier, and will only to serve to solidify already held opinions.

In last night's interviews with the owner of Wikileaks he admitted that his primary motivations are confrontation. He likes to piss off people in high places. They also reported that he has a criminal background, especially for hacking.

Having said all of that, I do think it will be interesting to see where all of this goes from here. My guess is that the wave will subside over the distance of time, probably sooner rather than later.

.

 

I don't remember it being reported that the military's tactics aren't working, that there are significant issues with pakistan support, or the possible commission of multiple war crimes.

 

Looks like you are correct. I was thrown by the "question" because I often go to sites that are reported on the news and often they are difficult to get to because of the traffic. To the best of my knowledge, the U.S. government does not censor web sites, particularly in other countries.

My apologies to the OP.

.

 

I guess we don't watch the same news, I hear this quite frequently, particularly on PBS. You might try, "the News Hour," "Need to know," "Frontline," "Charlie Rose" and if you can get them, the past couple of years of "Bill Moyer's Journal." All of these shows give you in depth interviews with experts, government officials and reporters, et al, who have been there. I have much of this recorded on DVD, a hobby of mine for about 2 years.

What you mention here are the very reasons I have been and remain opposed to continuing either of the Mid. East wars.

.

 

Welcome to peoples opinions.

 

Do you not have any of your own. are you that shallow.

 

I have LOTS of my own opinions, thanks.

 

Oh your not shallow, that's good.

 

Seems that within those 90,000 pages are the names of Afghan civilians and members of the Talaban who have given information to the U.S. Army about the movements of Al Qaeda and Talaban forces. It's a good thing terrorists can't read or they'd know who's been dropping the dimes.

My guess is the people named in these documents won't get any more birthday cards from Osama or invitations to the Talaban Ball, and I doubt we'll be getting much more information from Afghan citizens.

.

 

eek

that's the one argument i've had problems with when contemplating the removal of u$ forces from afghanistan

those guys are possibly already known to the taliban, this will just give them a shopping list

thanks for that info [i think]

 

Responsible news agencies redact and report without endangering lives. This jerk at Wikileaks is an irresponsible wanna-be reporter who seems to have no regard for the lives he claims to be protecting with his amateurish attempt to throw egg on the face of American troops and the Pentagon.

I'm not adverse to the public being informed, but there is a proper way to go about it.

.

 

what do you think the chances are we're going to airlift any of our less-well-connected 'friends' out of there?

[zero]

the taliban are not the vietnamese communists, they have no interest in re-education

[decapitation]

i redact my approval