Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Private Bradley Manning, under suspicion since May for leaking other intelligence, had previously contacted Lamo apparently telling Lamo that he gave a significant amount of classified information to Wikileaks.
Lamo said he turned Manning over to the Pentagon in an effort to keep the reports from becoming public. But considering the sheer volume of information that came to light yesterday, Lamo says Manning could not have acted alone.
“I do not believe that private manning had the technical expertise necessary to communicate this amount information to the outside world without being detected on his own,” he said. “And I don’t believe he operated without guidance, rather I think it’s more likely that he was a personal shopper for classified data for the Wikileaks apparatus.”
Nazi Gestapo: 1 officer per 2000 citizens.
Soviet KGB: 1 agent per 583 citizens.
GDR Stasi: 1 agent per 166 citizens.
US National Security: 1 top secret clearance per 362 citizens.
We have learned nothing from history.
Waaaaaaay too many classified documents that don't really need to be classified.
Nazi Gestapo: 1 officer per 2000 citizens.
Soviet KGB: 1 agent per 583 citizens.
GDR Stasi: 1 agent per 166 citizens.
US National Security: 1 top secret clearance per 362 citizens.
We have learned nothing from history.
Waaaaaaay too many classified documents that don't really need to be classified.
That's not your call. Anyone who discloses any classified information, specifically military information, is guilty of treason. They should be dealt with as per law.
That's not your call. Anyone who discloses any classified information, specifically military information, is guilty of treason. They should be dealt with as per law.
Ah, the government knows best and "the little people" shouldn't hold them accountable for the disproportionate amount of classified records relative to the population size. Another graduate from the school of Obama you are.
Ah, the government knows best and "the little people" shouldn't hold them accountable for the disproportionate amount of classified records relative to the population size. Another graduate from the school of Obama you are.
If it puts our soldiers in danger to reveal information to me that could also be seen by the enemy....then I'm not sure I want to know.
By your logic, we'd have made our WWII plans public before the D-Day invasion.
If it puts our soldiers in danger to reveal information to me that could also be seen by the enemy....then I'm not sure I want to know.
That's your prerogative.
Quote:
By your logic, we'd have made our WWII plans public before the D-Day invasion.
Nope, because the D-Day plans did not consist of a raw log of previous events such as IEDs. It was a plan discussing a future strike, and I'm willing to make a clear distinction. Just because your progressive friends in DC say you shouldn't see them, that makes it necessarily dangerous to soldiers?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
