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.
Exactly. So they can actually defend themselves against the radical Islamists who are actively trying to overthrown the Saudi royal family. I would rather have them in control of Saudi Arabia then Osama's followers.
Wikileaks and Americans who support this organization are actively trying to undermine President Obama and US foreign policy. They are freaking clueless about how the world works.
Depends if you are for supporting corrupt and unpopular and undemorcratic governments,which don't have a lot of support amoung their own, allowing radical islamists the moral ground.
Wikileaks is doing nothing but reporting what comes to light. Good for them. Enough of governments that don't tell the truth,seem more concerned with representing the corporate sector than the people and seek to control as many aspects of life as they deem necessary in the name of security.
Instead of looking to put the blame on external influences a lot of folk in America would perhaps do better to look into why countless Americans had access to these files and the security flaws in your system.
No illegal act has been commited and no lives put in danger,but a lot of embarressment has resulted as it should.
America would do best to eat humble pie and move on.
I find it very interesting that the same rightists who condemn the authoritarianism of "socialist" countries now espouse justifications for repressive "national security" policies that are very similar. It strengthens my belief that their primary objection to these governments is their belief about the immorality of "socialist redistribution" rather than any legitimate opposition to authoritarianism.
Very much so. These folk are often the first to claim they support freedom of speech.
They seem to conduct themselves more like an anarchist organization. If revealing that which was hidden in the dark (and some things should be left in the dark) makes one a terrorist (of which, I don't), then they are. To imply they are terrorists means that they would have a goal (money, political, religious), to which they would employ terrorist acts, that they seek to accomplish.
One mans terrorist organization is to another a freedom fighter, a position the outside world is increasingly taking.
When WikiLeaks obtains and publishes leaked documents from Al-Qaeda, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Cuba, I'll consider it more than another run-of-the-mill anti-Western anarchist treehouse filled with onanistic nerds sniffing glue and playing internet graffiti tag.
"There is a delicious irony in the fact that it is now the so-called liberal democracies that are clamouring to shut WikiLeaks down . . .
Even more so since Obama campaigned on a platform of "transparency" and how things were going to change, and only he could provide hope for the masses of Americans.
Now we see that Obama's definition of transparency is akin to the rind of an orange, nothing has change and he only hopes he can shut down Wikileaks.
And what is your point? No one likes the death of civilians. Dresden, Germany had over 100,000 deaths alone in the fire-bombing campaigns of WWII. Are you suggesting that we should have tried to fight the Nazi's in a way that would not have had as many civilian deaths? The sanitation of war can't be done and if you tried, you would only lose it. No good guys or bad guys in war - just winners and losers with civilians (on both sides) falling under the latter. Civilian deaths cannot be avoided and avoiding war isn't always an option (again, no avoiding war with the Nazi's or Japanese).
Difference being of course is that it was the Nazis and Japanese who were the perpertrators of that war. No such case in the Iraqi invasion which was built around lies.
Assange may not be a terrorist but he is an accomplice. The guy that released these documents may well be a traitor. If he is found guilty of treason then I sincerely hope he is hanged. If he is found guilty of a lesser crime he should never draw another breath as a free man.
So much for freedom of speech. The man is a messanger and not even an American.
Do you consider those that uncovered Watergate should be put to the gallows as well?
Would have been a prime time for a Soviet attack on US with all the crisis in government.
Any under the table deals to get Assange to America to face that lynch mob i hope is met by extreme condemnation by the free world and Australia should look carefully at it's relations with the US.
I do agree with you. To some extent, everyone seems to blame everything on terrorist groups or individuals these days, whether or not they are. I think it is being used a bit too much. Some things are warranted about the terrorist, but not everything is associated or part of a terrorist organization or individuals.
Doing this keeps a certain focus on our attnetion of terrorist, like we don't know they are here, right.
Well it is a good ploy. Get folk scared of possible terrorist attacks and under that guise introduce more extreme laws that will curtail individual freedoms with little fear of protest.
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.
