I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Poll
What is the most disturbing?
| That the leaks happened | 34% | 34% - 16 | ||||
| Suspicions of corruption in the Afghan government | 2% | 2% - 1 | ||||
| A global computer hacking effort by China | 10% | 10% - 5 | ||||
| Saudis remain the chief financiers of Sunni militants | 4% | 4% - 2 | ||||
| Vladimir Putangs relationship with Silvio Berluscon | 2% | 2% - 1 | ||||
| US failing to prevent Syria giving arms to Hezbollah | 0% | 0% - 0 | ||||
| US sharply warned Germany to not arrest CIA agents | 17% | 17% - 8 | ||||
| Obama admin struggling to sort out Pakistani partners | 0% | 0% - 0 | ||||
| Yemen cover up American missile strikes | 6% | 6% - 3 | ||||
| Qaddafi hooking up with a Ukrainian Blonde nurse | 21% | 21% - 10 | ||||
| Total: 46 | ||||||
The more I read by Peters, the more I get the impression that he's extremely full of himself.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6325|Graz, Austria
That guy apparently has no clue about Teh Internets.Lt. Col. Ralph Peters wrote:
We have the cyber capability to take down Wikileaks, could have done it before the first dump of information, could have destroyed their operating systems.
Does he really think that Julian Assange and his buddies are sitting in front of their computer somewhere in the Australian outback, downloading CIA trojans hidden in Viagra spam mails on their Windows 95 machine?
Besides, the recent leak was published in regular (print) media like The Guardian, NY Times, etc. first.
naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah... More like massive spam from the US Gov't, like MASSIVE spam.globefish23 wrote:
That guy apparently has no clue about Teh Internets.Lt. Col. Ralph Peters wrote:
We have the cyber capability to take down Wikileaks, could have done it before the first dump of information, could have destroyed their operating systems.
Does he really think that Julian Assange and his buddies are sitting in front of their computer somewhere in the Australian outback, downloading CIA trojans hidden in Viagra spam mails on their Windows 95 machine?
Besides, the recent leak was published in regular (print) media like The Guardian, NY Times, etc. first.
like that person who got their phone number posted by Justin Bieber.
i want to know what prince andrew did was inappropriate. i mean shit if foreign diplomats and stuff are used to prince philip, prince andrew must have worn a goat for underwear or something
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Haha I was thinking that when I read it.FatherTed wrote:
i want to know what prince andrew did was inappropriate. i mean shit if foreign diplomats and stuff are used to prince philip, prince andrew must have worn a goat for underwear or something
EDIT: To be clear, the Prince Phillip thing, not the goat underwear...
Last edited by ghettoperson (2010-12-01 09:38:28)
I mean, I feel like all those things were pretty obvious. Maybe not to Joe Schmo living in Bumblefuck, Yemen, but anyone should have been able to figure that stuff out themself.
Bottom line is Manning and possibly other people leaked shit that shouldn't have been leaked and a bunch of idiots got all worked up over the obvious.
Its a problem with no good answer. You can either severely limit the access to information, therefore making it almost impossible to use that information, or you can make the access to that information relatively easy and therefore run the risk that someone leaks it, as happened in this case. Now when someone starts leaking serious information, like SIOP, then we have a problem.
Bottom line is Manning and possibly other people leaked shit that shouldn't have been leaked and a bunch of idiots got all worked up over the obvious.
Its a problem with no good answer. You can either severely limit the access to information, therefore making it almost impossible to use that information, or you can make the access to that information relatively easy and therefore run the risk that someone leaks it, as happened in this case. Now when someone starts leaking serious information, like SIOP, then we have a problem.
Apparently neither do you...globefish23 wrote:
That guy apparently has no clue about Teh Internets.Lt. Col. Ralph Peters wrote:
We have the cyber capability to take down Wikileaks, could have done it before the first dump of information, could have destroyed their operating systems.
Does he really think that Julian Assange and his buddies are sitting in front of their computer somewhere in the Australian outback, downloading CIA trojans hidden in Viagra spam mails on their Windows 95 machine?
Besides, the recent leak was published in regular (print) media like The Guardian, NY Times, etc. first.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I voted for "that the leaks happened". Not so much due to the fact that they happened, but at how easy it apparently was to get all of this information.
The most disturbing thing is the UK govt agreed to limit an 'independent' public enquiry to suit US interests.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … quiry.html
Really the inquiry needs to start again, the right documents need to be disclosed and everyone re-questioned with the facts on the table.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … quiry.html
Really the inquiry needs to start again, the right documents need to be disclosed and everyone re-questioned with the facts on the table.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I don't it is a matter of them hunting and doing the due diligence, rather someone just gave it to them.mcgid1 wrote:
I voted for "that the leaks happened". Not so much due to the fact that they happened, but at how easy it apparently was to get all of this information.
Actually, in the case of the last three "leaks"...it's exactly that "someone just gave it to them". They didn't hunt or do any due diligence whatsoever. That's what makes the whole "Pulitzer Prize" thing for Assange so laughable.jsnipy wrote:
I don't it is a matter of them hunting and doing the due diligence, rather someone just gave it to them.mcgid1 wrote:
I voted for "that the leaks happened". Not so much due to the fact that they happened, but at how easy it apparently was to get all of this information.
From the article:Dilbert_X wrote:
The most disturbing thing is the UK govt agreed to limit an 'independent' public enquiry to suit US interests.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … quiry.html
Really the inquiry needs to start again, the right documents need to be disclosed and everyone re-questioned with the facts on the table.
Plenty of other context there to further explain it, as well. But why bother with that when you can go off half cocked with tinfoil hat conspiracy theories? They're sooo much more exciting than something as drab as the silly old facts...Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, said: “This news will come as a great surprise to the members of the Chilcot inquiry, who up till now have displayed a refreshing independence. There is an important distinction between preserving the national interest of the United States and protecting its government from embarrassment. I am sure the members of the Chilcot inquiry will not allow the latter to get in their way.”
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Things military he still is. However, the deeper he gets into politics, the more he sounds like a typical talking head. His books are good.
Well, let me qualify that. I've read "Never Quit the Fight" and "New Glory". a good portion of his books are just excerpts of some of his oped pieces. Still, interesting.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The problem is, the Chilcot enquiry has not been given that option, they've had information and documents hidden from them and their remit restricted.There is an important distinction between preserving the national interest of the United States and protecting its government from embarrassment. I am sure the members of the Chilcot inquiry will not allow the latter to get in their way.
Who exactly should decide what is in the national interest and what is embarassing to the govt of the day. I'd suggest it shouldn't be the govt of the day.
Or maybe future congressional enquiries should be barred from seeing any evidence or document which could potentially affect the national interest.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I bet this will spawn more person to person meetings. What say ye?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Quite probably, especially at the UN and between countries other than the US if the level of spying is to be believed.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
True enough. I think about the only thing that will come out of this is an increased reluctance to be candid with the US.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Lacking any other option that surprises, let alone disturbs me, I'm going withglobefish23 wrote:
I find it disturbing that we still don't have images of Gaddafi's voluptuous Ukrainian nurse posted.
I'd be disturbed if any despotic leader didn't have a voluptuous assistant.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
The concept makes him seem more likable, in a Bond villain sort of fashion.
Bond didnt have a face that looked like three week old meat loaf.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I said 'Bond villain,' not 'Bond.'
bond villains did not have faces that looked like three week old meat loaf. .. that i remember.
Xbone Stormsurgezz