Wikileaks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

There wasn't a "threat". The attack on Pearl Harbour was made before any formal declaration of war was made by Japan and without threat. It was pretty well much an undeclared lightning strike.

---

The "threat" was clear already in 1895 when China was defeated by the Japanese.

It was clear the USA was building a Asia Empire when they moved from defeating the Spanish as colonial masters in the Philippines to murdering local Philippinos demonstrating for Democratic elections in only 3 weeks.
And then to a multi-years long war suppressing any resistance to US power---and killing 300,000 locals in order to "Pacify' the place....
This put USA on collision course with Japan.

It was clear to the whole world by 1905 with the Japanese victory over Russia.

USA was expanding across the Pacific, US Army officers stationed in Philippines were dispatched all over the East Asian theatre on "Holidays", photographing and noting and mapping.
The later famous US General Stillwell was one of those who was sent to China at the start of the Xinhai Revolution in 1912-13 which led to the founding of the Chinese Republic....it was clear who the US would eventually bumping heads with.

Then in '31 with the Japanese seizure of Northern China, more clearly in '37 with the outbreak of open warfare between China and Japan and endless "incidents" with Western forces--see Panay Incident.
The ever increasing aggression of Japan meant inevitable conflict with everybody, and the US was in the same area..

The "threat" was clear.
The Philippines garrison had been reinforced during 40-41, additional air elements moved there both fighter and bombers. It was considered Americas forward base..Look at a map of the area.
Then in 1940:
US stopped export of airplanes, parts, machine tools, and aviation gasoline,
which pissed the Japanese off.
Much of the US navy stationed at US West Coast bases were moved forward during '40 and early '41.
USA, UK, and NL engineered in '41 iron embargo, then a credit embargo and oil embargo--war was nearly enevitable then.

And further, US code breakers had broken Japanese Naval codes..

There was ample obvious warnings.

The victors write history, and nobody n America reads.
They watch TV so naturally the extent of their analysis is to paraphrase what the heard while watch TV.
Thus the average American's view that "It was an unprovoked SURPRISE ATTACK" implying there was no hints no previous 20 years of increasing friction.

hoooey

Also see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Orange
War Plan Orange (commonly known as Plan Orange or just Orange) refers to a series of United States Joint Army and Navy Board war plans for dealing with a possible war with Japan during the years between the First and Second World Wars. The plans were begun informally in 1919 and formally adopted by the Joint Army and Navy Board beginning in 1924.[1] Predating the Rainbow plans, which presumed the assistance of allies, Orange was predicated on the U.S. fighting Japan alone. It anticipated a withholding of supplies from the Philippines and other U.S. outposts in the Western Pacific (they were expected to hold out on their own), while the Pacific Fleet marshaled its strength at bases in California, and guarded against attacks on the Panama Canal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

The "threat" was clear already in 1895 when China was defeated by the Japanese.

It was clear the USA was building a Asia Empire when they moved from defeating the Spanish as colonial masters in the Philippines to murdering local Philippinos demonstrating for Democratic elections in only 3 weeks.
And then to a multi-years long war suppressing any resistance to US power---and killing 300,000 locals in order to "Pacify' the place....
This put USA on collision course with Japan.

It was clear to the whole world by 1905 with the Japanese victory over Russia.

USA was expanding across the Pacific, US Army officers stationed in Philippines were dispatched all over the East Asian theatre on "Holidays", photographing and noting and mapping.
The later famous US General Stillwell was one of those who was sent to China at the start of the Xinhai Revolution in 1912-13 which led to the founding of the Chinese Republic....it was clear who the US would eventually bumping heads with.

Then in '31 with the Japanese seizure of Northern China, more clearly in '37 with the outbreak of open warfare between China and Japan and endless "incidents" with Western forces--see Panay Incident.
The ever increasing aggression of Japan meant inevitable conflict with everybody, and the US was in the same area..

The "threat" was clear.
The Philippines garrison had been reinforced during 40-41, additional air elements moved there both fighter and bombers. It was considered Americas forward base..Look at a map of the area.
Then in 1940:
US stopped export of airplanes, parts, machine tools, and aviation gasoline,
which pissed the Japanese off.
Much of the US navy stationed at US West Coast bases were moved forward during '40 and early '41.
USA, UK, and NL engineered in '41 iron embargo, then a credit embargo and oil embargo--war was nearly enevitable then.

And further, US code breakers had broken Japanese Naval codes..

There was ample obvious warnings.

The victors write history, and nobody n America reads.
They watch TV so naturally the extent of their analysis is to paraphrase what the heard while watch TV.
Thus the average American's view that "It was an unprovoked SURPRISE ATTACK" implying there was no hints no previous 20 years of increasing friction.

hoooey

---

A few more details there though, both the US and Japanese navies were clearly wargaming scenarios where the opponent could only be the other for years. Japanese battleships were designed specifically to be more powerful than the largest ship that could conceivably pass through the Panama canal because they knew that that would be the largest any American ship could be.

Then there were continued tensions due to Japanese protests about the treatment of ethnic Japanese in states like California throughout the 20s and 30s and the American refusal to force the states to give Japanese equal rights.

And finally Cordell Hull refusing to carry on negotiations with Japan merely days before Pearl Harbour, insisting on a full withdrawal from both Indo-China and China or a continued oil embargo, both of which the Japanese were clearly not going to accept.

Pearl Harbour was years in the making and as you say anyone who followed the diplomatic shenanigans in the build up could see thats where things were going.

Back to the topic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Read your broad unqualified words---or do you have a version of Tourettes syndrome that you type brain-farts without control.

Here, let me quote you since youve forgotten:


By your own words you have said that those Americans who waited for a direct threat to react were fools deserving whatever misery which came their way...nearly 2400 dead, thousands more injured..

Or doesn't your blustering big talk apply to Americans?

Or---the most likely scenario---you're just running your mouth as usual and typing words unhindered by the thought process.

So which is it, Riebe?
Thoughtless blather, or hate for Americans who died because they didn't react to threats?

---

Do you have a brain?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Do you have a brain?

---

Obviously, do you?
Not too obvious.
Also no balls to address your own words.

What's the matter Riebe?

Ashamed how moronic your words are?

You should be ashamed and should really be ashamed at your cowardly attacks on me in a hopeless effort to avoid explaining why the Americans way back in '41 deserve whatever...

And the obvious question, not really a question but an application of YOUR WORD, bub, clearly you think all those who were murdered on 9/11 were:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by View Post
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe View Post
anyone that waits for a direct threat to react, is a fool deserving what ever misery comes the ones way.

---

Al Quaida said they were going to attack. repeatedly.

Now I think most of your right wing extremists are like your recent heroes Bush and Cheney, purely Chickenhawks, but you, you won't even defend your own statement...

Do you have any morals?

Here it is again:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by View Post
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe View Post
Those that make direct threats are half of the time, blowing smoke, anyone that waits for a direct threat to react, is a fool deserving what ever misery comes the ones way.

---

Do you have any sense of shame?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Obviously, do you?
Not too obvious.
Also no balls to address your own words.

What's the matter Riebe?

Ashamed how moronic your words are?

You should be ashamed and should really be ashamed at your cowardly attacks on me in a hopeless effort to avoid explaining why the Americans way back in '41 deserve whatever...

And the obvious question, not really a question but an application of YOUR WORD, bub, clearly you think all those who were murdered on 9/11 were:



Al Quaida said they were going to attack. repeatedly.

Now I think most of your right wing extremists are like your recent heroes Bush and Cheney, purely Chickenhawks, but you, you won't even defend your own statement...

Do you have any morals?

Here it is again:



Do you have any sense of shame?

---

Do you have any sense period?

This is getting senseless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eki

This is getting senseless.

---

Badda-boom!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eki

This is getting senseless.

---

Senseless is a obnoxious lout making stupid comments and when the gross stupidity is gently pointed out to him, not even acknowledging his own statements and
acting as if he never wrote what he wrote.

But I do agree, any dialog with people like Reibe is by its very nature senseless.

His crowd cannot defend indefensible utterances, and according to themselves, can never do or say, or write anything wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cali

Back to the topic?

---

Sounds reasonable to me….

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave B

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...s-us-air-force

The USA appears to be inching towards internet censorship. They can no longer take the moral high ground when dealing with the Great Firewall of China, I guess.

---

:up: Which is a nice exhibition of frustration and desperation by the US.

Guess the vain Espionage Act resurrection, media smear campaign, and political grandstanding wasn’t enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Wikileaks has already done more than enough to discredit themselves...

---

…. And this would compensate for the disgrace of the US government?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hondo

… Assange and others like him have an axe to grind against certain powers that be, for grievances real or imagined. This is not being done with the sole altruistic purpose of bringing light to the world.

Assange is probably not a completely clean, upstanding citizen himself …… He'll get a couple of million off of book and movie deals, become a blown out of proportion cult hero like Che, and recede into obscurity.

All things considered, he's just another fad.

---

I hope he is another fad. One of many hopefully. To be replaced by others willing to expend their resources and make good of any opportunity to monitor governments, corporations and other forms of hierarchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

... The real story of Wikileaks? After two or three weeks of agonizing over this BS, most of what I have read confirms that the Americans, while having other opinions behind closed doors that are different from the public positions, are still in many ways better....

---

As far as foreign ‘diplomacy' goes? Yeah, but that's about it. It sure isn’t about ‘national interests’, otherwise this country wouldn’t be so dysfunctional on so many fronts; particularly the social-economical elements.

Whether it’s Wikileaks, some other medium or a lone hacker - as long as they’re not disclosing how to make bombs or advocating violence - then I’m fine with it. I don’t care if it’s cable leaks from international affairs or behind the big-money scenes of conducting ‘business’. The more people know, the better off we are. Considering how decades of malfeasance ran this country into the ground to the point that just about everyone is affected in some way - it’s about time more people became aware of what’s going on.... and actually took some interests.

Wonders never cease... :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Senseless is a obnoxious lout making stupid comments and when the gross stupidity is gently pointed out to him, not even acknowledging his own statements and
acting as if he never wrote what he wrote.

But I do agree, any dialog with people like Reibe is by its very nature senseless.

His crowd cannot defend indefensible utterances, and according to themselves, can never do or say, or write anything wrong.

---

Here is a inter-net hanky, http://foolstown.com/sm/ma.gif now take two aspirin and go lie down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

…. And this would compensate for the disgrace of the US government?

:dozey:

---

I've yet to see anything from Wikileaks that disgraced any government. If the public finds any of these leaks as shocking, then I'd suggest the public in general doesn't have much of a grasp as to what goes in in diplomatic relations, or for that matter even a lot of company board meetings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

I've yet to see anything from Wikileaks that disgraced any government. If the public finds any of these leaks as shocking, then I'd suggest the public in general doesn't have much of a grasp as to what goes in in diplomatic relations, or for that matter even a lot of company board meetings.

---

Have you actually had a proper look at the leaks? If governments are not disgraced by what has been revealed in some of the documents, then we are all a lot more fu@ked than we though we were. Some of the war crime revelations (just to mention one area of the leaks) are plain old sickening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

Have you actually had a proper look at the leaks? If governments are not disgraced by what has been revealed in some of the documents, then we are all a lot more fu@ked than we though we were. Some of the war crime revelations (just to mention one area of the leaks) are plain old sickening.

---

Tsk tsk, it's only a War Crime if other people designated by the White house do it. Killing millions of people in order to bring them democracy and save them from ____________________________(fill in the blank) is always perfectly acceptable if somebody in the US Government says it's OK.

Remember, to die for Freedom™ is a privilege.


And don't forget "they" don't value life we "we'' do, so it doesn't bother "them" to see all their parents or kids blown into biftek hâché, or filled with lead the same way as it bothers us.

In general we should always learn from ''the other side'', those who call themselves Republi-tari-baggers who answered those of us who decried the rape of the Bill of Rights guarantee of "freedom in their persons from unreasonable search in seizure " with a pithy phrase which we can return now:

If the Gubbymint officials and Military weren't doing anything illegal, then what are they afraid of?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

I've yet to see anything from Wikileaks that disgraced any government. If the public finds any of these leaks as shocking, then I'd suggest the public in general doesn't have much of a grasp as to what goes in in diplomatic relations, or for that matter even a lot of company board meetings.

---

If I recall correctly, you were regarding Wikileaks - in some sense or another - as no different from slanted news sources. Which is where I took the quote from.

In other words, Wikileaks is basically a harmless source, like any other media, with exception to propaganda that suits a particular audience.

That being said, I’ll admit that it is an apples and oranges comparison whenever comparing state agencies to private mediums. Govt responsibilities and pressures are far greater than what those in the information industry are accustomed to. Nevertheless with that responsibility comes accountability.

Accountability is something that the ruling class appears to have some amnesia with.

For instance:

- why is it that the govt bailed out the banks and auto industry, but did nothing for the private farmers (25-30 years ago) when they faced a $ crisis due to no fault of their own?

- How is it that this country is involved in two wars, yet allowed the Walter Reed M.C. turn into an unsanitary relic of a hospital?

- why was it so difficult to be prepared for (at the very least) elementary emergency response protocol prior to more than enough warning of Hurricane Katrina arriving in the gulf region?

- speaking of the gulf region, why was there no govt oversight of BP’s containment/clean-up operations after they already were proven to be negligent on other (prior) disasters that cost lives?

- how is it that a nation that engaged in a lengthy, bloody conflict that cost over 54,000 american lives - all for the sake of fighting communism - finally discovered it’s in debt to a communist nation, that supported their adversary?

These are questions that I, along with some other folks I’m sure, would like to see answered. Which won’t happen of course.

Mr. Assange is no saint, but his reputation will hardly be as tarnished as those, the powers that be, who condemn him, and who fear what he represents: knowledge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

If I recall correctly, you were regarding Wikileaks - in some sense or another - as no different from slanted news sources. Which is where I took the quote from.

In other words, Wikileaks is basically a harmless source, like any other media, with exception to propaganda that suits a particular audience.

That being said, I’ll admit that it is an apples and oranges comparison whenever comparing state agencies to private mediums. Govt responsibilities and pressures are far greater than what those in the information industry are accustomed to. Nevertheless with that responsibility comes accountability.

Accountability is something that the ruling class appears to have some amnesia with.

For instance:

- why is it that the govt bailed out the banks and auto industry, but did nothing for the private farmers (25-30 years ago) when they faced a $ crisis due to no fault of their own?

- How is it that this country is involved in two wars, yet allowed the Walter Reed M.C. turn into an unsanitary relic of a hospital?

- why was it so difficult to be prepared for (at the very least) elementary emergency response protocol prior to more than enough warning of Hurricane Katrina arriving in the gulf region?

- speaking of the gulf region, why was there no govt oversight of BP’s containment/clean-up operations after they already were proven to be negligent on other (prior) disasters that cost lives?

- how is it that a nation that engaged in a lengthy, bloody conflict that cost over 54,000 american lives - all for the sake of fighting communism - finally discovered it’s in debt to a communist nation, that supported their adversary?

These are questions that I, along with some other folks I’m sure, would like to see answered. Which won’t happen of course.

Mr. Assange is no saint, but his reputation will hardly be as tarnished as those, the powers that be, who condemn him, and who fear what he represents: knowledge.

---

Knowledge in the wrong hands is why Japan and Germany lost WWII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Knowledge in the wrong hands is why Japan and Germany lost WWII.

---

Blind ambitions with power is what cost them the war.

The same equation that's scavaged this country with career politicians prostituting themselves out for corporate pimps.

If that wasn't the case then there would have been no issue about earmarks and the recent Supreme Court ruling for corporations to donate to campaigns.

Further more I'll add, that when any American on this forum (or outside of it for that matter) can convince me that this country is a democracy, and not an oligarchy - I stop supporting the likes of Wikileaks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Tsk tsk, it's only a War Crime if other people designated by the White house do it. Killing millions of people in order to bring them democracy and save them from ____________________________(fill in the blank) is always perfectly acceptable if somebody in the US Government says it's OK.

Remember, to die for Freedom™ is a privilege.


And don't forget "they" don't value life we "we'' do, so it doesn't bother "them" to see all their parents or kids blown into biftek hâché, or filled with lead the same way as it bothers us.

---

Well said :)

Seconded cali :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

I've yet to see anything from Wikileaks that disgraced any government. If the public finds any of these leaks as shocking, then I'd suggest the public in general doesn't have much of a grasp as to what goes in in diplomatic relations, or for that matter even a lot of company board meetings.

---

I gave a prime example earlier in the thread.

If you don't accept "Collatoral Murder" and the fact that the only person to ever be punished was the person that released it to Wikileaks as being hugely embarrassing to the US administration, then I am at a loss for words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

Blind ambitions with power is what cost them the war.

---

Sounds a lot like Assange.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Sounds a lot like Assange.

---

Sounds good ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Sounds a lot like Assange.

---

I can't argue that.

Though I must say it also sounds a lot like the corrupted bunch that keeps:

- expressing a need for peace talks, yet out sells the rest of the world in the arms trade industry.

- talking about protecting this country from terrorism, yet tried to cede control of 6 ports to a middle-eastern company.

- preaching about democracy, yet support well-known regimes (like Saddam) with $ and/or military hardware.



Years ago I heard over the radio one of Bruce Springstines' concert recordings. Prior to entertaining, he reflected on the (then) recent closing of the Vietnam conflict, of which he stated; "Having blind faith in your leaders will get you nothing but killed."

Didn't completely understand it myself then. But made a lot of sense some years later (when in service), and still does now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

I can't argue that.

Though I must say it also sounds a lot like the corrupted bunch that keeps:

- expressing a need for peace talks, yet out sells the rest of the world in the arms trade industry.

- talking about protecting this country from terrorism, yet tried to cede control of 6 ports to a middle-eastern company.

- preaching about democracy, yet support well-known regimes (like Saddam) with $ and/or military hardware.



Years ago I heard over the radio one of Bruce Springstines' concert recordings. Prior to entertaining, he reflected on the (then) recent closing of the Vietnam conflict, of which he stated; "Having blind faith in your leaders will get you nothing but killed."

Didn't completely understand it myself then. But made a lot of sense some years later (when in service), and still does now.

---

As I said earlier, one conservative pundit, said on a talk-show, in effect, Assange is a zit on a gnats ass, the fact that leaks EXIST, is what everyone should be focusing on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

...it’s about time more people became aware of what’s going on.... and actually took some interests.

---

:up: :up: :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

As I said earlier, one conservative pundit, said on a talk-show, in effect, Assange is a zit on a gnats ass, the fact that leaks EXIST, is what everyone should be focusing on.

---

The point made about Assange is a valid one but that point tells me that the reaction to the leaks by politicians should be the focus of attention, not the leaks themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

The point made about Assange is a valid one but that point tells me that the reaction to the leaks by politicians should be the focus of attention, not the leaks themselves.

---

No that the leaks exist at all , was the point.
Any reaction is closing the barn door after the horses got out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

If I recall correctly, you were regarding Wikileaks - in some sense or another - as no different from slanted news sources. Which is where I took the quote from.

In other words, Wikileaks is basically a harmless source, like any other media, with exception to propaganda that suits a particular audience.

That being said, I’ll admit that it is an apples and oranges comparison whenever comparing state agencies to private mediums. Govt responsibilities and pressures are far greater than what those in the information industry are accustomed to. Nevertheless with that responsibility comes accountability.

Accountability is something that the ruling class appears to have some amnesia with.

For instance:

- why is it that the govt bailed out the banks and auto industry, but did nothing for the private farmers (25-30 years ago) when they faced a $ crisis due to no fault of their own?

- How is it that this country is involved in two wars, yet allowed the Walter Reed M.C. turn into an unsanitary relic of a hospital?

- why was it so difficult to be prepared for (at the very least) elementary emergency response protocol prior to more than enough warning of Hurricane Katrina arriving in the gulf region?

- speaking of the gulf region, why was there no govt oversight of BP’s containment/clean-up operations after they already were proven to be negligent on other (prior) disasters that cost lives?

- how is it that a nation that engaged in a lengthy, bloody conflict that cost over 54,000 american lives - all for the sake of fighting communism - finally discovered it’s in debt to a communist nation, that supported their adversary?

These are questions that I, along with some other folks I’m sure, would like to see answered. Which won’t happen of course.

Mr. Assange is no saint, but his reputation will hardly be as tarnished as those, the powers that be, who condemn him, and who fear what he represents: knowledge.

---

Simple answer: In America most will do anything for money. Just a question of how much it takes to overcome morals and honesty and everything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

No that the leaks exist at all , was the point...

---

Quote:

---

WikiLeaks is part of the phenomenon of the online, empowered citizen ... these are facts that aren't going to go away. Government and authorities need to wise up to that."

---

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ers-government

The over-reaction to "a zit on a gnats ass" among some politicians - that Julian Assange & Wikileaks are terrorists, traitors, spies, and worse - is a knee-jerk reaction to something they didn't and couldn't control, and many would argue shouldn't control.

Governments shouldn't control anything. They should do what the people that voted them into power want them to do, which is to serve the people and the best interests of the counrtry as a whole. Unfortunately, governments do their own thing and do as little as possible to keep people happy to secure their votes at the next lot of polls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

As I said earlier, one conservative pundit, said on a talk-show, in effect, Assange is a zit on a gnats ass, the fact that leaks EXIST, is what everyone should be focusing on.

---

And because I’m a conservative I am suppose to agree with him? Hardly. I belong to no group, have no alliances, and I most certainly don’t trust mankind - regardless of what shape or form of altruistic agendas that one faction, or another, might present.

People here need to be focused on the activities of the govt., (with OUR $$$ ) and the corporations that control it. The same concept that many people had during Viet Nam. Good grief! Are we, as a country, that short-sited?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janvanvurpa

Simple answer: In America most will do anything for money. Just a question of how much it takes to overcome morals and honesty and everything else.

---

You know as well as I do that people generally don’t open the aperture wide enough to register the entirety of an issue. Especially us Americans with our amenities. I was hoping to see that other Americans would have been a bit more focus on both parties, not just Assange.

I actually thought we were better than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

The over-reaction to "a zit on a gnats ass" among some politicians - that Julian Assange & Wikileaks are terrorists, traitors, spies, and worse - is a knee-jerk reaction to something they didn't and couldn't control, and many would argue shouldn't control.

---

That’s what worries me, is both liberals and conservatives over here have been duped to thinking that Wikileaks is the problem, without even considering the government’s role in the world… all this while we’re going bankrupt, and people will still allow themselves to be led to the slaughterhouse of propaganda.

This clearly shows how vulnerable we are to practices of conditioning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AAReagles

And because I’m a conservative I am suppose to agree with him? Hardly. I belong to no group, have no alliances, and I most certainly don’t trust mankind - regardless of what shape or form of altruistic agendas that one faction, or another, might present.

People here need to be focused on the activities of the govt., (with OUR $$$ ) and the corporations that control it. The same concept that many people had during Viet Nam. Good grief! Are we, as a country, that short-sited?

---

I am not that paranoid, and beyond armed revolt, all the finger pointing in the world does no good.
Political parties or at least- the talking heads- should make a huge point that those in government should be flushing out those embedded within the belt-way that are a cancer rotting the country from within.

Cripes, now we have the pathetic crying man in charge of the Congress.

All the brough-ha-ha about ethnic profiling is just a scam to prevent using something that will expose them as the corrupt forces they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Cripes, now we have the pathetic crying man in charge of the Congress.

---

Do you believe that all men who cry are pathetic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Do you believe that all men who cry are pathetic?

---

No just this sobbing twit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skc

I gave a prime example earlier in the thread.

If you don't accept "Collatoral Murder" and the fact that the only person to ever be punished was the person that released it to Wikileaks as being hugely embarrassing to the US administration, then I am at a loss for words.

---

In reality, you'd be more at a loss for the factual information. The unedited version of the footage, along with all the other information and investigations was made public. Though no doubt the actions of some of the people were not warranted, that is easy for us to judge sitting at a computer and not having scumbags fire RPGs at us.

But if you look at the unedited versions and other information, it's clear that lack of press identification, identified weapons in an unauthorized area, and their actions in event were the primary causes of those men losing their lives., not to mention the suffering inflicted on the children involved.

Assange also claimed that the military tried to keep the children from getting medical help, but it is documented that they were immediately taken to a forward operating base for emergency medical treatment.


If things such as this are taken as the comdemning information being leaked, then I just hope the public actually seeks the reality of thing they leak rather than the edited Clif Notes versions with lies attached.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12141530
"If the Iranian government was to attempt to coercively obtain this information from journalists and activists of foreign nations, human rights groups around the world would speak out,"
Freedom of press?
I guess it must somehow make more sense to harass icelandic MPs than to spend the energy on going after the real baddies :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

In reality, you'd be more at a loss for the factual information. The unedited version of the footage, along with all the other information and investigations was made public. Though no doubt the actions of some of the people were not warranted, that is easy for us to judge sitting at a computer and not having scumbags fire RPGs at us.

---

I have seen the unedited version and it is shocking. Not just this but also the destruction of the building after this event with complete disregard of civillian casulaties.

Throuout all of this, there was never a shot fired by these men and the RPG that was identified was actually a long lense camera which shortly before the incident took a picture of a US Humme less than 100 yards away. There was no suggestion that these people had fired although there were some AK-47's held unfired by the men which I think is quite legal in Iraq.

There had been some insurgent activity in the general area from a rooftop based group which is what the copters were supposed to be looking for but this was obviously not the group.

Quote:

---

But if you look at the unedited versions and other information, it's clear that lack of press identification, identified weapons in an unauthorized area, and their actions in event were the primary causes of those men losing their lives., not to mention the suffering inflicted on the children involved.

---

Lack of press indentification????? The chopper couldn't differentiate between a RPG and a long lense camera, let alone a press pass. What were the reporters to do? Paint their asses red and flash them at the pilots to have a pot-shot at?

The area you mention is a residential place that people live in. Not some killing field and the suffering inflicted on those innocent children was caused by those American pilots firing on a man that had stopped to help the wounded.

Your attitude to those children strangly reflects the pilots who's comments were that it was the drivers fault for being there and not their fault for shooting them.

Quote:

---

Assange also claimed that the military tried to keep the children from getting medical help, but it is documented that they were immediately taken to a forward operating base for emergency medical treatment.

---

No, the order was given to evacuate the children to the US base at Rustamiyah but later this was countermanded and they were handed over to the Iraqi police to take to hospital.

Quote:

---

If things such as this are taken as the comdemning information being leaked, then I just hope the public actually seeks the reality of thing they leak rather than the edited Clif Notes versions with lies attached.

---

FFS. You have journalists being murdered and blame them for not identifying themselves to a Helicopter despite them holding cameras and not RPG's. You have an unarmed father being murdered for daring to offer assistance. You have children being wounded and their injuries being blamed on their murdered father for being in an area the US decided to turn into a battle zone. You have dead bodied being run over and laughed about. You have helicopter pilots being allowed to fire missiles at buildings when it has been identified that civilians were in the firing line.

You have a gung-ho approach with no respect or regard for people that the US obviously regard as not worthy of thought or feeling. It's almost as if the US view the Iraq people as lesser species, worthy of contempt.

Condemning? I think it's utterly shamefull and a disgrace that justifies how the US has descended from being the Land of the Free and a beacon for free speech and expression to being regarded as the warmongers of the world and oppressors of justice.

Shame on you for perpetuating this view with defence of the indefensible :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Do you believe that all men who cry are pathetic?

---

yes