Samalander Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 IE if US has been giving sharks with laser beems attached to Israelis. http://southcapitolstreet.com/2010/12/13/stephen-colbert-has-the-last-word-on-the-mossad-sharks/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinDonner Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 ...and the balance tips even further away from "responsible journalism" towards "cartoon wannabe-supervillain". Your bullets cannot harm him! His blackmail-material is like a shield of steel! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Tormund - that's only if we or our arab allies have been up to things that they shouldn't be.That's an extremely subjective standard though, isn't it? Something that might be perfectly justified to one nation may induce another one to begin hostilities or execute the people involved.The implication here is that everything that involves intelligence is somehow nasty and shouldn't be done. Should Ultra and Magic have been disclosed during WWII because listening to another countries' secret communications is "wrong"? How about allied assistance/cooperation with dissident groups/resistance fighters? Expose all that too? How about exposing the names of dissidents within an oppressive theocracy like Iran who were receiving assistance from outside?Are those all secret things that shouldn't be done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 ...and the balance tips even further away from "responsible journalism" towards "cartoon wannabe-supervillain".A responsible journalist is one who shows videos of squirrels water-skiing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Should Ultra and Magic have been disclosed during WWII because listening to another countries' secret communications is "wrong"?Are we at war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund Ukrainesbane Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Are we at war? Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantabile Posted December 31, 2010 Author Share Posted December 31, 2010 Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.Which is why Antarctica will become the new haven of humanity. I'll take penguins over Big Brother any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sad King Billy Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 I've never known why orwell didn't include africa as a proper superpower, but if it's not a shithole like eurasia, i'll take the heat over the cold any day of the week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakkie Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Are we at war?Is the Sky Blue? Does a bear shit in the woods? Of course we're at war, we're people, it's what we're best at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Mord Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 EDIT: Never mind. Sometimes it's just crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daunpunk Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 How WikiLeaks Enlightened Us in 2010That's a list of just some of the things Wikileaks revealed last year. Here's to hoping they'll do even more in 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantabile Posted January 2, 2011 Author Share Posted January 2, 2011 We need some leaks about the Catholic Church, just so we can see the Inquisition become reinstated by the Pope to seek vengeance on Assange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daunpunk Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 From the link I just posted:Pope Benedict impeded an investigation into alleged child sex abuse within the Catholic Church, according to a leaked diplomatic cable. Not only did Pope Benedict refuse to allow Vatican officials to testify in an investigation by an Irish commission into alleged child sex abuse by priests, he was also reportedly furious when Vatican officials were called upon in Rome.Hope that helps. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Assange will put the world into chaos if he is jailed or killed.So does this apply if he actually commits/has committed a crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seventh Pup Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 He is above the mere laws of man.Honestly I wish wikileaks was headed by someone else. I am generally in favor of the concept of wikileaks, to a point. But I think it is bullshit to the highest order that Assange would make that threat. I generally think how he has handled the allegations of sexual misconduct have been bullshit. That is all. In short I think Assange is asshole, while wikileaks stands to make a positive impact on society if it plays it's cards right. However the fact that Assange is such an asshole makes worry they won't. I a way he reminds me a Dick Cheney, which makes me question everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All-for-Joffrey Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 So instead of endlessly arguing back and forth about the ethics of Wikileak and Assange and whether it's right or wrong and the wide array of opinions in between, maybe we can actually just accept that it's out there and start compiling and discussing the leaks that are constantly coming out. Like this one about Israel preparing for a "full scale Middle Eastern war:"http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/01/03/131940.htmlIsrael's army chief told a U.S. Congress delegation in late 2009 he was preparing for a large war in the Middle East, probably against Hamas or Hezbollah, leaked U.S. diplomatic cables showed Sunday."I am preparing the Israeli army for a large scale war, since it is easier to scale down to a smaller operation than to do the opposite," Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi was quoted as saying in a cable from the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv, according to AFP.The article title is a bit hyperbolic as it implies he's really just preparing for war against Gaza, Lebanon or Iran (unless I'm mistaken, Saudi Arabia gave Israel the go ahead to fly over their airspace if they wanted to bomb Iran). But what I found most disconcerting and a firm indicator that Ashkenzai is going to burn in the seven hells is this:However, in the cable leaked Sunday Ashkenazi is quoted saying Israel next time will not accept "any restrictions on warfare in populated areas," and insisted the army had never intentionally attacked civilian targets.So, unless I'm misinterpreting him, he's saying that the army had never intentionally attacked civilian targets during Cast Lead but won't take any precautions to prevent civilian casualties in the future. Anyway, just because the very point of this thread seems to be debating over whether or not Wikileaks should be releasing these documents, I will say that no, I do not think this document should have been released as it's the type of thing that could lead to an escalation of tensions and, in the worst case, lead to a scenario similar to the 1967 when the Soviets issued false documents to the Arab countries claiming that Israel was preparing to attack. However, these documents are now public domain and pretending they're not there and that we don't know about them is futile. I noticed that this leak hasn't been reported in any Western news sources that I've seen (go figure) and that makes me wonder how many other things have been released and overlooked by the media? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 So, unless I'm misinterpreting him, he's saying that the army had never intentionally attacked civilian targets during Cast Lead but won't take any precautions to prevent civilian casualties in the future. I think you're making a pretty big leap.he's saying that he won't accept RESTRICTIONS on war in populated areas, which is in no way even similar to PRECAUTIONS.Either way, the dangerous game here is obvious, and you've illustrated it very well, though unintentionally.Namely, it's difficult to make interpretations based on snippets of quotes taken out of context, particularly when you factor in the level of confirmation bias that is so prevalent in these types of discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Like this one about Israel preparing for a "full scale Middle Eastern war:"They'd be pretty stupid not to be preparing for war -- I'd bet they write something like this every year.So, unless I'm misinterpreting him, he's saying that the army had never intentionally attacked civilian targets during Cast Lead but won't take any precautions to prevent civilian casualties in the future. No. They'll take precautions -- they have to, otherwise the UN gets involved and that's annoying. What he's saying is that the next time Hamas or Hezbollah or whoever decides to safeguard rockets or other materiel or important personnel from air strikes by putting them in populated areas, Israel may be willing to strike regardless.I noticed that this leak hasn't been reported in any Western news sources that I've seen (go figure) and that makes me wonder how many other things have been released and overlooked by the media?It's overlooked by the media because there is very little interesting here. That Israel was preparing for war in 2009 is not something openly discussed, but it's assumed since they're always preparing for war. The statement that they won't accept restrictions is more interesting, but it needs to be in context as the Americans may have convinced them to act otherwise. And there wasn't actually a war in 2009 or 2010 so it's sort of a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Nan Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Eh, if Israel stopped pussyfooting around and firebombed Palestine off the map they might actually get respect from the Arabs. Since they're not going to, this: Namely, it's difficult to make interpretations based on snippets of quotes taken out of context, particularly when you factor in the level of confirmation bias that is so prevalent in these types of discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samalander Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Anyone interested in reading the leaks in haiku form:http://haikuleaks.tetalab.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.