Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - changing how you think about afghanistan: a massive leak of military documents.

Slims · 08-01-2010, 08:11 AM

I agree that the NY Times, Guardian, and Der Spiegal did conduct some investigative reporting off the information that was provided through Wikileaks....But Wikileaks was just a conduit. As an organisation they knowingly accepted stolen classified material and then passed it on.

Also, you can't really believe your statement regarding the consequences of the leaked documents. Be honest.

If the government did cooperate with Wikileaks and asked for all the incendiary reports to be with held Wikileaks would have told the government to go piss up a rope. The only value these documents hold for Wikileaks is that they damage the governement and thus attract attention.

Also, considering the foundation on which Wikileaks is built, there is absolutely no way the US government could reasonably expect Wikileaks to keep any sort of secret. That Wikileaks dangled the information in order to tease the government into voluntarily pointing out the 'good bits' does not make them less responsible.

With regard to your last comment about the calculated decision: I am sure that is exactly what happenned. Except the government probably concluded that to not-assist was less damaging than having Wikileaks 'decide' what they were going to release after receiving additional classified information from the government.

Besides, it isn't as easy to release that sort of thing as you would imaging. It would take (I believe) the Director of National Intelligence to approve such a release personally and a couple of weeks is simply not enough time to sort through 90,000 documents and weigh all the consequences and collateral impacts.

08-01-2010, 08:11 AM	#53 (permalink)
Slims Eccentric insomniac Location: North Carolina	I agree that the NY Times, Guardian, and Der Spiegal did conduct some investigative reporting off the information that was provided through Wikileaks....But Wikileaks was just a conduit. As an organisation they knowingly accepted stolen classified material and then passed it on. Also, you can't really believe your statement regarding the consequences of the leaked documents. Be honest. If the government did cooperate with Wikileaks and asked for all the incendiary reports to be with held Wikileaks would have told the government to go piss up a rope. The only value these documents hold for Wikileaks is that they damage the governement and thus attract attention. Also, considering the foundation on which Wikileaks is built, there is absolutely no way the US government could reasonably expect Wikileaks to keep any sort of secret. That Wikileaks dangled the information in order to tease the government into voluntarily pointing out the 'good bits' does not make them less responsible. With regard to your last comment about the calculated decision: I am sure that is exactly what happenned. Except the government probably concluded that to not-assist was less damaging than having Wikileaks 'decide' what they were going to release after receiving additional classified information from the government. Besides, it isn't as easy to release that sort of thing as you would imaging. It would take (I believe) the Director of National Intelligence to approve such a release personally and a couple of weeks is simply not enough time to sort through 90,000 documents and weigh all the consequences and collateral impacts. __________________ "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence