WikiLeaks

[Melito]

I think it does more harm than good.

The harm does not come form leaking them, it comes form the content that should not have been done in the first place.
Governments (I'm doing an exaggerated generalization here), hide things mostly because it does not go by what the people wants or it goes against ethical principals.

 

[just me]

I actually agree with Ahmadinejad on this one.....he says it is just mischief. I don't believe a word of it. They will mix truths to make it all look real. Mischief, indeed.

Sound fanatical?

 

[Barnabas]

God, this is why I have so little hair.....

naked bunny

 

[Barnabas]

Hard to enforce considered we ourself had to use deforestation chemicals to see what is moving where.

What would you have done? And saying not that isn't an answer, military and political leaders have to make hard decision based on the information they have. If U.S. soldiers are dying because a jungle is to thick for them to fight in then you get rid of the jungle.

I'd rather see deal leaves then dead men.

 

[muir]

The use of agent Orange wasn't just to clear the foliage

It was deliberatly contaminated with a dioxin which is harmful to people. This was not just to clear foliage it was a dirty weapon the same as mustard gas, napalm (which the US also used), depleted uranium (which the US also used) and cluster bombs (which the US also used). It was also intended to destroy crops and ruin the food supply of the civilian population.

Have a read of this link if you want but be aware it contains some disturbing images:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_orange

Also bare in mind that a large corporation: MONSANTO manufactured the agent orange so people were making a lot of MONEY out of this. The policy makers are often on the boards of corporations, have shares in them or get political funding from them

The answer to the question 'what would you do?' is i would do what the US did in the end anyway and PULL OUT of Vietnam

 

[invisible]

our governments have been doing a lot of things over the past years that constitute atrocity. the reason people are getting hold of information and releasing it is because they believe that our governments can no longer be trusted to behave responsibly. they don't believe that people in power are trying to destroy the world. perhaps in many cases people in power believe that human rights violations they perpetrate are justified by the cause. people who are working to release information are just trying to make governments responsible for their actions. maybe if more people had more of an idea of what was really involved, they would decide that war was not justified. but without this information, all they have access to is government propaganda, and they can't make an informed decision, and so their vote to go to war is essentially just a rigged election.

don't you want to know, when your country is torturing people without providing them a trial? isn't it what you're fighting for, so that people can be treated with justice? aren't you violating your own principles? i'm sorry if it's so terrible that i want to know these things.

 

[Barnabas]

The use of agent Orange wasn't just to clear the foliage

It was deliberatly contaminated with a dioxin which is harmful to people. This was not just to clear foliage it was a dirty weapon the same as mustard gas, napalm (which the US also used), depleted uranium (which the US also used) and cluster bombs (which the US also used). It was also intended to destroy crops and ruin the food supply of the civilian population.

Have a read of this link if you want but be aware it contains some disturbing images:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_orange

Also bare in mind that a large corporation: MONSANTO manufactured the agent orange so people were making a lot of MONEY out of this. The policy makers are often on the boards of corporations, have shares in them or get political funding from them

The answer to the question 'what would you do?' is i would do what the US did in the end anyway and PULL OUT of Vietnam

You have nothing to support the idea that it was intended to be used against citizens and combatants. When the companies the produced it were taken to court, judges ruled in their favor based on the fact that it was to be used on foliage and crops.

Destroying food supplies has been a military strategy from the dawn of time. The idea being that you can't fight wars if you can't feed your soldiers.

But don't let this make you think I don't feel for the victims, it's a terrible thing with the only benefit being that it is very unlikely that we use a chemical of that nature again in any kind of military operation.

 

[~jet]

You have nothing to support the idea that it was intended to be used against citizens and combatants. When the companies the produced it were taken to court, judges ruled in their favor based on the fact that it was to be used on foliage and crops.

Destroying food supplies has been a military strategy from the dawn of time. The idea being that you can't fight wars if you can't feed your soldiers.

But don't let this make you think I don't feel for the victims, it's a terrible thing with the only benefit being that it is very unlikely that we use a chemical of that nature again in any kind of military operation.

Naw, we've gone over to depleted uranium instead. Gotta love those birth defects.

 

[muir]

And you think that the military industrial complex doesn't have influence on the courts?

We have investigations here in Britain all the time and do you know what they find? Nothing. Government whitewash everytime.It is a performance to let the public feel that someone is monitoring things

Did you not read the wikipedia link?:

Internal memos reveal that Monsanto Corporation (a manufacturer of 2,4,5-T) had informed the U.S. government as early as 1952 that 2,4,5-T that was contaminated with a toxic chemicals

You can't go spraying 20 MILLION gallons of that stuff over fields, crops, people, water supplies and eco systems without it affecting PEOPLE

They knew EXACTLY what they were doing and what the implications would be

They knew it was toxic and that it would get into the biosphere....they knew cos that was the specification

 

[~jet]

And you think that the military industrial complex doesn't have influence on the courts?

We have investigations here in Britain all the time and do you know what they find? Nothing. Government whitewash everytime.It is a performance to let the public feel that someone is monitoring things

Did you not read the wikipedia link?:

Internal memos reveal that Monsanto Corporation (a manufacturer of 2,4,5-T) had informed the U.S. government as early as 1952 that 2,4,5-T that was contaminated with a toxic chemicals

You can't go spraying 20 MILLION gallons of that stuff over fields, crops, people, water supplies and eco systems without it affecting PEOPLE

They knew EXACTLY what they were doing and what the implications would be

They knew it was toxic and that it would get into the biosphere....they knew cos that was the specification

Entire towns had to be forcibly abandoned due to varying circumstances surrounding chemicals like this. Monsato is also one of the most married to the government in terms of getting it's people elected, and then using the de-elected as lobbyists. Military contractors do similar. As do the seven grand health insurance cartels. And big oil, big coal, and big corn. Hell, the taxpayer gave Exxon, last year, hundreds of millions in tax refunds... Exxon paid in 0, thanks to all the wonderful loopholes that predominantly republican congresses gave them since Reagan.

It's a system by and for the corporation now. One of the fourteen ailments common to every documented fascist state in the past... the marriage of government and business interests.

 

[Barnabas]

Naw, we've gone over to depleted uranium instead. Gotta love those birth defects.

"to be exposed to radiation from uranium, you have to eat, drink, or breathe it, or get it on your skin."

If you've been hit with an DUAP round then you have hell of a lot more to worry about then radiation.

 

[~jet]

"to be exposed to radiation from uranium, you have to eat, drink, or breathe it, or get it on your skin."

If you've been hit with an DUAP round then you have hell of a lot more to worry about then radiation.

Ah, but that is exactly what IS happening... those rounds disperse a LOT of DU dust after being used... dust that ends up in, for example, crops, water supplies, the air, on people's skin. Birth defects skyrocket wherever the stuff has been used thus far;

 

[Barnabas]

Ah, but that is exactly what IS happening... those rounds disperse a LOT of DU dust after being used... dust that ends up in, for example, crops, water supplies, the air, on people's skin. Birth defects skyrocket wherever the stuff has been used thus far;

I doubt it, it requires a lot of exposure to get radiation sickness from DU. I'd like to see more studies. Personally I'd be more worried about the troops who handled it. They spent a lot of time around the shells.

 

[muir]

Governments have never worried too much about troops....they are pawns....collateral damage. The only time their deaths become inconvenient is when they begin to sway public opinion back home

The US and UK governments had their troops injected with vaccines in the first gulf war. The French soldiers were not given the vaccines. Many of the US and Uk troops contracted 'gulf war syndrome' but the French soldiers didn't

I bet a pharmaceutical company made a lot of money out of it though

In the 1970's the US saw many adverts warning people about a coming swine flu and told the entire population that they needed to get a swine flu jab (now thats fearmongering!)

There was one recorded death from swine flu but hundreds of people were adversely affected by the jabs including deaths.

The vaccines contain thiomersal which is a mercury preservative which it has been found is a neuro toxin. It has been linked to growing autism levels in the states and lowering IQ's

But i bet the pharmaceutical companies made a lot of money. They have tried the same trick again recently.

The problem with a capitalist society is that PROFIT comes first. Corporations don't have a mechanism for conscience built into them. Also corporation tax is often so little that it is cheaper for corporations to break rules and pay the tax then it is to act within the rules (eg not dump toxic waste)

Here's a link about depleted uranium: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium_shells

Look it's a bit doom and gloom having to post all this negative stuff Barnabus, if someone says something has happened why don't you check it out for yourself?

 

[Lucifer]

This time it isn't, but I have a hard time believing it will never in it's career on the web, release any pertinate information?

Wikileaks actually takes the time to sift through the information they receive and only release things they do not deem to be a national security threat. So no probably not.

 

[Bird]

That's why I take precautions. I suggest you do the same.

LMAO and you don't think that government militaries
take less precaution than you do? Pretty sure these
folks would not have a very hard time hacking into
your things.

You so silly Luzi.

 

[corvidae]

I'm not sure what to think about this. On one hand I would like to keep the government open and accountable. On the other hand...

‎How many times do you keep a secret from your wife/girlfriend that she, in fact, does look hideously fat in that dress.
Now, how would you like Mr. Assange popping in and saying, 'Hiyooo! He really thinks you look hideously fat, here's a recording of his thoughts!"

 

[Barnabas]

Governments have never worried too much about troops....they are pawns....collateral damage. The only time their deaths become inconvenient is when they begin to sway public opinion back home

The US and UK governments had their troops injected with vaccines in the first gulf war. The French soldiers were not given the vaccines. Many of the US and Uk troops contracted 'gulf war syndrome' but the French soldiers didn't

I bet a pharmaceutical company made a lot of money out of it though

In the 1970's the US saw many adverts warning people about a coming swine flu and told the entire population that they needed to get a swine flu jab (now thats fearmongering!)

There was one recorded death from swine flu but hundreds of people were adversely affected by the jabs including deaths.

The vaccines contain thiomersal which is a mercury preservative which it has been found is a neuro toxin. It has been linked to growing autism levels in the states and lowering IQ's

But i bet the pharmaceutical companies made a lot of money. They have tried the same trick again recently.

The problem with a capitalist society is that PROFIT comes first. Corporations don't have a mechanism for conscience built into them. Also corporation tax is often so little that it is cheaper for corporations to break rules and pay the tax then it is to act within the rules (eg not dump toxic waste)

Here's a link about depleted uranium: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium_shells

Look it's a bit doom and gloom having to post all this negative stuff Barnabus, if someone says something has happened why don't you it check it out for yourself?

I checked the wiki well before you posted it, I also noted the giant sticker at the top saying that the article was under review for neutrality. Which is why I didn't post it myself.

Also your statements are false,the nature of any government based on the nature of the people in the country and the people running it. The same goes with political and fiscal philosophies.

 

[Barnabas]

Wikileaks actually takes the time to sift through the information they receive and only release things they do not deem to be a national security threat. So no probably not.

The problem is that they handle information that is a threat even if they don't release it. So to allow my nerd flag to fly for a moment

"Who's watching the Watchmen"

 

[Lucifer]

The problem is that they handle information that is a threat even if they don't release it. So to allow my nerd flag to fly for a moment

Why would that be a problem? Prominent new organizations handle sensitive information all the time, should they be shut down?