If you haven't heard this by now, do a google search. And smack yourself upside the head for not paying attention.
My question: Is this "security breach" a good thing, a bad thing, or is this not going to matter once the MSM loses its hardon for this issue and gets back to covering Lindsey Lohan?
I myself am kind of torn on this issue. On one hand, I applaud the first class private for having the balls to bring the truth of the ongoing Afghan war into public scrutiny, because very little was known, except the cleaned up versions that the MSM were constantly feeding us. Also, this will throw a monkey wrench into the funding of this abomination that is doing nothing but killing our soldiers by giving money to the Pakistanis who in turn give aid to the Taliban, Al Queda and shelter to Bin Laden. I pray that this will be the catalyst that will bring our men home, but I refuse to let myself get too hopeful.
On the other hand, a leak like this is bad because it provides ammunition to idiot bloggers and the like to twist these findings to "prove" that Obama is the antichrist that feeds on the blood of babies. Also, the bleeding hearts are in arms because the reality of war is too much for them to handle.
Link to how stupid and diluted Americans can be.
Do I support this war? @!#$ no, we have no business there, the Pakistanis and Afghans know this and use our own faulted system against us. As far as Im concerned, the soldiers that died there died and gave blood only to lube the gears of war (not trying to make a video game reference here lol) and line the pockets of the weapons manufacturers who continue to profit while our men and women die. The reasons why our volunteer army is failing is because there hasnt been a war that we truly believed in since WWII. Bring our troops home, and use that money to improve our own security, and fix our rapidly crumbling political system.
Wikileaks is a very one sided source of limited information.
mitdr774 wrote:Wikileaks is a very one sided source of limited information.
Ok can you explain a lil why you feel that way .
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved Acts 16:31
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.
" Mark Twain "
I have come across a few of their "reports" that with very little searching could be found to be intentionally misleading. Its just like every other group with some sort of agenda.
mitdr774 wrote:I have come across a few of their "reports" that with very little searching could be found to be intentionally misleading. Its just like every other group with some sort of agenda.
Maybe their agenda is to wake people up that's what i think .
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved Acts 16:31
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.
" Mark Twain "
the thing i find stupid is the goverment figureheads responding to the papers. in one sentance they say this is very dangerous and that some of the reports could ead to are millitary men being killed and then in the very next sentance they are responding with, well lets not blow this out of proportions, these arn't very secret and not that big a deal. its like they don't know wich way to go so they are trying to both ways. at least have the nuts to take a stance on the subject instead of trying to have it both ways.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
R.W.E. of the J.B.O. wrote:Can you say "dog and pony show"?
Definitely. Hey, wait, it's just like any other "news" organization now-a-days. At least Wikileaks is at least providing un-edited, complete-in-full copies of everything as backup.
mitdr774 wrote:Wikileaks is a very one sided source of limited information.
They certainly take a political side when presenting their edited versions and commentary, but they still provide
everything, which can't be said for, well, pretty much
any other site/organization.
sndsgood wrote:the thing i find stupid is the goverment figureheads responding to the papers. in one sentance they say this is very dangerous and that some of the reports could ead to are millitary men being killed and then in the very next sentance they are responding with, well lets not blow this out of proportions, these arn't very secret and not that big a deal. its like they don't know wich way to go so they are trying to both ways. at least have the nuts to take a stance on the subject instead of trying to have it both ways.
Yep, who would have thought, politicians playing politics
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
OHV notec wrote:R.W.E. of the J.B.O. wrote:Can you say "dog and pony show"?
Definitely. Hey, wait, it's just like any other "news" organization now-a-days. At least Wikileaks is at least providing un-edited, complete-in-full copies of everything as backup.mitdr774 wrote:Wikileaks is a very one sided source of limited information.
They certainly take a political side when presenting their edited versions and commentary, but they still provide everything, which can't be said for, well, pretty much any other site/organization.sndsgood wrote:the thing i find stupid is the goverment figureheads responding to the papers. in one sentance they say this is very dangerous and that some of the reports could ead to are millitary men being killed and then in the very next sentance they are responding with, well lets not blow this out of proportions, these arn't very secret and not that big a deal. its like they don't know wich way to go so they are trying to both ways. at least have the nuts to take a stance on the subject instead of trying to have it both ways.
Yep, who would have thought, politicians playing politics
A few of the "unedited" videos are missing portions. I dont recall the exact ones I came across but one was missing roughly 3 minutes of very important footage that completely proved their "report" wrong.
Video is a notoriously undependable way to convery accurate accounts of complex subjects. From selective editing to downright technical fakery, it is about the most malleable, and therefore least dependable, source out there.
Wikileaks is simply getting its obligatory 15 minutes of fame. It will descend into the abyss soon enough as it either ceses to exist via legal issues, or bows under to pressures that turn it into a video version of the National Enquirer.
