Author Topic: WikiLeaks  (Read 25161 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline indi

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Death to David Pleat.
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #25 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 05:49:06 pm »
Iranians are Persians, not Arabs.

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #26 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 05:53:41 pm »
This is dynamite!

But we all know this kind of s*** goes on, its just basically unsaid or public knowledge.  Intersting that a lot of arab states are pushing for the US to invade and destory Irans Nuclear program.

Hey Arab lads, do it your fcking seleves.



Saudi's are havng it both ways, funding madrassas and spreading hard core islam and on the other hand asking the US to attack Iran.
i've never seen a penny mate.

Check with Mrs Madass.  :mackems:

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #27 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 05:56:14 pm »
Iranians are Persians, not Arabs.

NOt the point. They fear Shia islam which is funded and aided by Iran. The shites are more radical as seen in Iraq, Saudi etc...

Offline James

  • Book Wanker Wannabe
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #28 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 06:18:51 pm »
Tremendously irresponsible.

I don't see how you can have come to that opinion independently in such a short period of time, my guess is that you're simply regurgitating someone else's. I haven't seen anything yet that isn't either along the lines that everyone would have imagined anyway, or merely embarrassing for the US government. If you've seen something "tremendously irresponsible" then point it out and I might change my opinion, but my guess is that there isn't anything.

Releasing documents about South Korea and US discussing reunification of Korea less than a week after North Korea murdered 4 innocent people?
I looked into the eye of the Island and what I saw was beautiful.

Offline GeordieMessiah

  • Forum Colossus
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #29 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 06:20:01 pm »
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-rude-prince-andrew :lol:

"The Americans don't understand geography. Never have. In the UK, we have the best geography teachers in the world" :lol:
Whether it's God or the bomb
It's just the same
It's only fear under another name
And the corporate snakes coming in to feed
On that pathetic fact known as human greed
Skin and bone being raked over those hot coals
This dump never seems to give time for human soul

Offline indi

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Death to David Pleat.
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #30 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 09:14:22 pm »
Iranians are Persians, not Arabs.

NOt the point. They fear Shia islam which is funded and aided by Iran. The shites are more radical as seen in Iraq, Saudi etc...

My point was that it's not actually shocking at all that the Arabs have it in for Iran.

Offline Northerngimp

  • Brexit W*nker
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #31 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 09:20:50 pm »
Newsnight should be good tonight.

Offline mouldy_uk

  • General Member
  • Forever NUFC
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #32 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 09:59:43 pm »
WikiLeaks reveals US Nuclear Weapons in the Netherlands
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/11/09BERLIN1433.html

 :frantic:

Offline GeordieMessiah

  • Forum Colossus
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #33 on: Monday 29 November 2010, 10:14:24 pm »
Interesting analysis of the Mugabe situation
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2007/07/07HARARE638.html
Whether it's God or the bomb
It's just the same
It's only fear under another name
And the corporate snakes coming in to feed
On that pathetic fact known as human greed
Skin and bone being raked over those hot coals
This dump never seems to give time for human soul

Offline GeordieMessiah

  • Forum Colossus
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #34 on: Tuesday 30 November 2010, 01:45:01 pm »
Latest from wikileaks : relationship between Cheryl and Wagner was "strained".

Yes, I nicked this from Paul Sinha's Twitter
Whether it's God or the bomb
It's just the same
It's only fear under another name
And the corporate snakes coming in to feed
On that pathetic fact known as human greed
Skin and bone being raked over those hot coals
This dump never seems to give time for human soul

Offline Rob W

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #35 on: Tuesday 30 November 2010, 02:59:26 pm »
WikiLeaks reveals US Nuclear Weapons in the Netherlands
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/11/09BERLIN1433.html

 :frantic:

Is that the same Netherlands that had Cruise Missiles based there during the 80's????
The rapturous, wild & ineffable pleasure of drinking at someone else's expense

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #36 on: Tuesday 30 November 2010, 07:14:30 pm »
(S) Amb. Gibinvish noted that "some experts in Russia
believe that Iran will have a bomb in 10 to 15 years."
Russia, he said, is concerned about this matter as well, and
has "put forward initiatives" with Iran.  Russia hopes to
discuss this further with Saudi Arabia in the near future,
and he said that an "important delegation" would be coming to
Riyadh in about two months to discuss this with the Saudi
leadership.  Prince Turki said that the Russian delegation
would be welcomed, stressing that "we must work together to
get them to abandon their effort to acquire nuclear weapons.
Israel too, he said, must be convinced to surrender its
nuclear arsenal.
  :lol:

S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 RIYADH 000181
 
SIPDIS
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/27/2019
TAGS: PARM PREL MARR MNUC IR SA RU
SUBJECT: SAUDI EXCHANGE WITH RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR ON IRAN'S
NUCLEAR PLANS
 
Classified By: P/M COUNSELOR SCOTT MCGEHEE
REASONS 1.4 (b) (d).
 
http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/cable/2009/01/09RIYADH181.html

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #37 on: Tuesday 30 November 2010, 08:29:46 pm »
WikiLeaks' next target will be a major US bank. "It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume—For this, there's only one similar example. It's like the Enron emails."

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julia...ange-inter.html

Offline GeordieMessiah

  • Forum Colossus
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #38 on: Tuesday 30 November 2010, 08:37:47 pm »
WikiLeaks' next target will be a major US bank. "It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume—For this, there's only one similar example. It's like the Enron emails."

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julia...ange-inter.html


That link doesn't work, fella.
Whether it's God or the bomb
It's just the same
It's only fear under another name
And the corporate snakes coming in to feed
On that pathetic fact known as human greed
Skin and bone being raked over those hot coals
This dump never seems to give time for human soul

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #39 on: Tuesday 30 November 2010, 10:24:26 pm »
WikiLeaks' next target will be a major US bank. "It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume—For this, there's only one similar example. It's like the Enron emails."

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julia...ange-inter.html


That link doesn't work, fella.

See happy face about that, I cut and pasted it from a post of his.

Try this..

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julian-assange-inter.html


Offline GeordieMessiah

  • Forum Colossus
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #41 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 12:36:43 am »
WikiLeaks' next target will be a major US bank. "It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume—For this, there's only one similar example. It's like the Enron emails."

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julia...ange-inter.html


That link doesn't work, fella.

See happy face about that, I cut and pasted it from a post of his.

Try this..

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julian-assange-inter.html

:thup: Looks like he's really going for it. I don't know...I guess Assange rates his life as being less valuable than the pursuit of freedom and trth or something...he's a man on a mission anyway.
Whether it's God or the bomb
It's just the same
It's only fear under another name
And the corporate snakes coming in to feed
On that pathetic fact known as human greed
Skin and bone being raked over those hot coals
This dump never seems to give time for human soul

Offline Revolution Number 9

  • General Member
  • Pourquoi l'homme aye!
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #42 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 01:49:04 pm »
Interpol are going after him for 'sex attack allegations'.

In other words they're going after him to shut him up and made up an offence or two.
For mine I will say Spurs. She's generally entertaining and good to look at, but is inconsistent and thinks far too highly of herself. Creates far too much drama for someone of so little importance.

Offline Incognito

  • General Member
  • Get your hands off me you freak
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #43 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 02:19:53 pm »
So it'll be back to Wikipaedoia then?
RIP gejon/cajun/ Jon Lockwood.

Proud to have made your acquaintance Sir.

Offline Jimburst

  • General Member
  • Yeah Buddy!
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #44 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 02:32:54 pm »
Wahey!
A splatterhouse turd done in the manky toilets of a discotheque, brought on my the consumption of cowies or toot.

Offline Village Idiot

  • General Member
  • Want a hug?
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #45 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 03:45:30 pm »
Not surprising, but in the case of Spain the cables show our government cozying up with the US to stop a judge that was investigating torture against a Spanish prisoner in gitmo.

Ah, realpolitik...
"us" = Barça

-------------------

"At times of crisis, people spend money to see us play: we've got a responsibility to play nice football, otherwise what the hell are they spending their money for?"
-Paco Jémez-

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #46 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 04:46:42 pm »
WikiLeaks' next target will be a major US bank. "It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume—For this, there's only one similar example. It's like the Enron emails."

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julia...ange-inter.html


That link doesn't work, fella.

See happy face about that, I cut and pasted it from a post of his.

Try this..

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/29/julian-assange-inter.html

:thup: Looks like he's really going for it. I don't know...I guess Assange rates his life as being less valuable than the pursuit of freedom and trth or something...he's a man on a mission anyway.

There are others lined up to replace him if and when he gets taken down/ smeared/ Guantanomoed.

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #47 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 04:47:02 pm »
Interpol are going after him for 'sex attack allegations'.

In other words they're going after him to shut him up and made up an offence or two.

Pretty much.

Offline Parky

  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #48 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 05:06:32 pm »
Wikileaks controversy highlights debate over shield law
   


By Paul Farhi
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 21, 2010

Until just a few weeks ago, news organizations thought they were cruising toward a long-cherished goal: Congressional passage of a federal shield law to protect journalists from being forced to reveal confidential sources.

Then came Wikileaks.

The notoriety surrounding Wikileaks.org's release of nearly 76,000 secret military documents last month has complicated, and possibly imperiled, enactment of shield legislation pending in the Senate, proponents and opponents of the measure both say.

Wikileaks apparently obtained the documents, describing the U.S. military's conduct of the war in Afghanistan, from a military source and posted them on the Internet. The release sparked praise and criticism, the latter from government officials who said the revelations could endanger U.S.-led forces and their Afghan allies. At the same time, Wikileaks made the documents available to the New York Times and two other news organizations, which published stories based on them. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says that his group plans to release an additional 15,000 documents this month.

The shield legislation would protect journalists from having to reveal anonymous sources when challenged by prosecutors in federal court. The protection wouldn't apply in all cases, however. In matters involving terrorism and national security, government lawyers could ask a judge to remove the shield. The bill passed the House and a Senate panel last fall, and it may come up for Senate debate after the August recess.

Supporters of the bill point out that such a law wouldn't affect Wikileaks. As a "virtual" organization, with no fixed address or country of origin, Wikileaks isn't subject to U.S. law, meaning it couldn't be protected or subjected to disclosure by an American court.

Nevertheless, Wikileaks seems to be overshadowing the discussion.

"It's true that some members of Congress are concerned" in the wake of Wikileaks' disclosures, says Kevin Smith, president of the Society of Professional Journalists, which has been advocating for a shield law for years. "There's a guilt-by-association factor here."

But opponents of the legislation say it gives judges too much leeway to determine what's in the "public interest" when it comes to protecting journalists in cases involving national security. They fear that investigators would have to release sensitive information to convince a judge to force a reporter to reveal his sources. For these reasons, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary committee, has called the bill "deeply and fundamentally flawed."

One Republican aide, who was not authorized by his boss to speak publicly about the issue, said, "The Wikileaks controversy highlights some of the significant national security concerns about the shield legislation." As a result, he predicted the measure would not move forward this year.

Offline Gorilla

  • Likes gambling
  • General Member
Re: WikiLeaks
« Reply #49 on: Wednesday 1 December 2010, 05:27:51 pm »
Seems like the CIA have been DDOSing them.