readmoreoften
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-08-10 03:09 PM
Response to Original message |
| 66. Yes, it's all a big rightwing conspiracy. |
| -Wikileaks had 1.2 million documents during the Bush administration. |
pnwmom |
Dec-06-10 11:44 PM |
#0 |
 -
but, but, but...... |
FrenchieCat |
Dec-06-10 11:45 PM |
#1 |
  -
Yes, it is about information. You jump to conclusions based on wrong information |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-07-10 12:42 AM |
#49 |
| -
You need to post this seperately |
Le Taz Hot |
Dec-07-10 06:27 AM |
#63 |
| -
Thank you, I think I will. This whole post was so |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-08-10 03:09 PM |
#65 |
| -
Hmmmm.... |
Bluerthanblue |
Dec-06-10 11:47 PM |
#2 |
| -
Who told you anyone can post anything on Wikileaks? I've never heard that one. |
Write Left |
Dec-06-10 11:48 PM |
#3 |
| -
Read the link. It's from their site. Welcome to DU, by the way. n/t |
pnwmom |
Dec-06-10 11:50 PM |
#7 |
| -
Thanks for the welcome. |
Write Left |
Dec-07-10 12:00 AM |
#14 |
| -
Not so far, anyway. n/t |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:05 AM |
#20 |
| -
Other way around. They stopped using the technology. |
boppers |
Dec-07-10 12:14 AM |
#31 |
| -
Wrong. You are completely wrong. Read what they say here: |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-07-10 01:03 AM |
#58 |
| -
I have heard him say they verify/research the info before posting. |
glinda |
Dec-06-10 11:55 PM |
#9 |
| -
The link is from the Wikileaks site. Maybe you misheard. n/t |
pnwmom |
Dec-06-10 11:59 PM |
#13 |
| -
No, it's not, anybody can look at the URL and see that's false. |
boppers |
Dec-07-10 12:10 AM |
#25 |
| -
Unbelievable. Thank you boppers. n/t |
Catherina |
Dec-07-10 12:13 AM |
# |
| -
Thanks. I'm thinking the poster hasn't spent much time on Wikileaks' site. nt |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:53 AM |
#55 |
| -
Maybe you misread. I said that I have heard him say otherwise. I know what the linked site says. I |
glinda |
Dec-07-10 12:11 AM |
#26 |
| -
Clearly the OP has not read Wikileaks site where they |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-06-10 11:58 PM |
#11 |
| -
What are you talking about? The quotes are from a Wikileak document. |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:00 AM |
#15 |
| -
click on the submissions tab on the current website |
Tunkamerica |
Dec-07-10 12:14 AM |
#30 |
| -
I am talking about your claim that they will accept anything. |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-07-10 12:27 AM |
#41 |
| -
sorry commented to wrong person |
Tunkamerica |
Dec-07-10 12:13 AM |
#28 |
| -
makes one wonder |
Rosa Luxemburg |
Dec-06-10 11:48 PM |
#4 |
| -
The organization started in 2007. What exactly is your point? |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-06-10 11:49 PM |
#5 |
| -
It actually started in 2006. The Bush administration would be far more |
pnwmom |
Dec-06-10 11:51 PM |
#8 |
| -
The site was launched in 2006 but they were not publishing |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-07-10 12:15 AM |
#32 |
| -
If Assange is so neutral, why is he calling on Obama to resign? |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:16 AM |
# |
| -
This administration, shamefully |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-07-10 12:59 AM |
#56 |
| -
Well, the government certainly seems to be responding as if... |
Goldstein1984 |
Dec-06-10 11:49 PM |
#6 |
| -
One of the "facts" they have recently released is a list of facilities |
pnwmom |
Dec-06-10 11:58 PM |
#12 |
| -
Things like dams and pipelines tend to be more than a little obvious. |
Lord Magus |
Dec-07-10 12:01 AM |
#16 |
| -
The internet won't tell you which ones the U.S. government considers critical. |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:07 AM |
#22 |
| -
It wouldn't be hard to figure out. |
Lord Magus |
Dec-07-10 12:28 AM |
#42 |
| -
Truth is truth |
Goldstein1984 |
Dec-07-10 12:10 AM |
#24 |
| -
Sometimes secrecy is vitally important, even in a democracy. |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:19 AM |
#36 |
| -
Secrecy has been taken too far |
Goldstein1984 |
Dec-07-10 12:28 AM |
#43 |
| -
How do you know we're not talking about defensive plans being explosed |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:35 AM |
#45 |
| -
Here's where our opinions will part drastically |
Goldstein1984 |
Dec-07-10 01:01 AM |
#57 |
| -
Omg. Now Al Qaida can attack us with a LIST! |
EFerrari |
Dec-07-10 01:04 AM |
#59 |
| -
You were quoting from what is obviously an opinion piece, not a news story. |
LooseWilly |
Dec-07-10 01:05 AM |
#60 |
| -
Do you know who founded Wikileaks? |
Puregonzo1188 |
Dec-06-10 11:56 PM |
#10 |
| -
American exceptionalism. We think everything's about us. nt |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:02 AM |
#18 |
| -
Then why didn't they release any when Bush was in office? |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:09 AM |
#23 |
| -
because they didn't have them |
Tunkamerica |
Dec-07-10 12:16 AM |
#33 |
| -
And you know there was nothing seriously incriminating |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:18 AM |
#35 |
| -
No, just like you don't know that there was. |
Tunkamerica |
Dec-07-10 06:22 AM |
#61 |
| -
You know what, you ask the same questions |
Le Taz Hot |
Dec-07-10 06:34 AM |
#64 |
| -
That fact is, two of those "real journalists" asked Assange |
EFerrari |
Dec-07-10 12:02 AM |
#17 |
| -
All they put out were those fucking gitmo handbooks. |
xultar |
Dec-07-10 12:05 AM |
#19 |
| -
LOL, using archived versions of old policy to make false claims about current policy? |
boppers |
Dec-07-10 12:07 AM |
#21 |
| -
But Wikileaks also says they will be publishing additional documents on their own site, |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:12 AM |
#27 |
| -
I like Assange. Free speech is very important. Who knows really where he is going with all of this. |
glinda |
Dec-07-10 12:14 AM |
#29 |
| -
They can do their own vetting on smaller document loads. |
boppers |
Dec-07-10 12:20 AM |
#37 |
| -
Just redacting names isn't sufficient vetting. Identities can be gleaned |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:22 AM |
#40 |
| -
Well, Wikileaks has a lot of people working for them. I'm sure they'd have room for one more. |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:42 AM |
#50 |
| -
5 full time paid folks, 800 part time volunteers. |
boppers |
Dec-07-10 12:44 AM |
#51 |
| -
Yep! nt |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:50 AM |
#54 |
| -
Oh, a lot more is being redacted. |
boppers |
Dec-07-10 12:49 AM |
#53 |
| -
He said that would happen if something happens to him. I'm sure he's had things ready to go on a... |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:37 AM |
#46 |
| -
Incredibly lame. So, Assange's motivation is Obama-hating. |
inna |
Dec-07-10 12:17 AM |
#34 |
| -
No, his chief motivation appears to be self-promotion. n/t |
pnwmom |
Dec-07-10 12:21 AM |
#38 |
| -
I'm sure you would have felt differently had you been paying attention when he was exposing Bush. |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:40 AM |
#48 |
| -
:crickets: |
Tunkamerica |
Dec-07-10 06:23 AM |
#62 |
| -
Pitiful and myopic |
TheKentuckian |
Dec-07-10 12:22 AM |
#39 |
| -
Would Julian be so kind to roll those out for us....nt |
and-justice-for-all |
Dec-07-10 12:33 AM |
#44 |
| -
He was a Karl Rove super agent all along! |
Rex |
Dec-07-10 12:39 AM |
#47 |
| -
ROFL!! That must be it! nt |
laughingliberal |
Dec-07-10 12:44 AM |
#52 |
| -
Yes, it's all a big rightwing conspiracy. |
readmoreoften |
Dec-08-10 03:09 PM |
#66 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread