I'm guessing it's not "if" but "when". I know there are many, many people responsible for wikileaks, and one will take his place when he's gone, but currently he's the only one brazen enough to take credit for their leaks. For it or against it, you gotta admit, that guy's time is limited.

He won't be touched. There is way too much publicity around this which makes it too obvious.

I missed this. What happened?

he leaked what was gonna happen on the season finale of Dexter i think...

Oic lol not a big deal to me cause I still don't have cable yet

He's the face of wikileaks.org, they publish thousands of classified documents (government and otherwise).

They Feds are going to try to go after him by declaring him a terrorist. They just arrested him on charges from Sweden that they dropped seeral times because there was no evidence. They have proof the women conspired via text prior to going to the cops.



I figured the greatest speech ever given by a politician was pertinent to the topic at hand so here goes. This is just the meat of the speech, the entire speech is very good if you have the time. It was given by JFK on april 27 1961, he was addressing the press.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fnkdf...e_gdata_player

Bail denied big shock.

The press is usually all "free speech" and "confidential sources", until **** gets real. Now they're all against Assage, which I don't get because it just proves any press can be taken down one way or another.



Like I said in post 1 though, someone else will just take his place, though I'm sure the next guy will be a bit more anonymous.

The media has nothing to do with free press and it hasn't for some time. Large corporations own all of the media outlets and across several markets. They will do nothing that puts their own interests at risk. This wikileaks thing should be a wake up call to that fact. Read the documents, then read the major news outlets spin on it. HINT, the actual documents tell a different story than the news, but they know that most americans won't read the documents, so they can pretty much say they say whatever they want. These major corporations that don't push the gov't spew get sanctioned and screwed over by the various tools the feds have to use against them, FCC, patriot act, etc... They will never do anything that puts their own interests in jeopardy. The fact that the last few elections hasn't proved that to the American people just shows how utterly hopeless things really are. I could go on for hours about a multitude of things the "media" has failed to even mention. The media is merely PR firm for the gov't agenda, even when they supposedly call the gov't on something it's never anything of substance, it's something rediculous, every once in a while the gov't throws them a bone so people still buy all the lies they are sellin. This guy fucked an aid, here ya go people feed on this guy for a while. Meanwhile we'll do things all over the world that cause "Blowback" on the american people, then they act as if the blowback was a total surprise, gee why are those people so pissed?



The media plugs stupid **** as big news while the big things breeze right by. It's the age old trick of watching one hand while the other pics your pocket. It's no accident, the media and the gov't have a nice little you scratch our back we'll scratch yours. Why do you think quietly and quickly corporations were allowed to buy both the newspaper, tv and radio in the same market? This was up until recently illegal. Now comcast and NBC are going to merge, have you seen a lot of coverage on that? The coverage you do see tells us how wonderful it will be. Our government has intentionally put the press in the hands of the very masters they serve. Do you honestly think that a candidate that vowed to break up the media monopoly and restore the free press would get a lot of face time? Do you honestly believe a candidate like that would stand a chance of getting elected? Then there is your answer.



Our gov't has been operating in total secrecy and against the american people's best interests for some time. We've turned a blind eye because that's what we do, it's the easy thing to do and it doesn't put us at risk. The big question is will we do anything now that our noses have been rubbed in it or will we just continue on our way, electing more criminals, acting angry and surprised when they commit crimes? Will we continue to turn a blind eye like the romans did as their empire collapsed around them?

It's julian ftr.

It's not only people turning a blind eye, my generation has been zombified by the mass media and liberalizing college campuses. They follow whatever is popular wholeheartedly without ever being able to explain why.

****** hippies...

I`m kind of torn on this .... One hand the Libertian side of me thinks its great that governmental discussions and motives are exposed.. But on the other hand, releasing raw material from intergovernmental agencies, could get people killed who are just doing their jobs, ie`: exposing people working on certain files, like weapon systems and what not..

i've read through a great deal of the documents and seen nothing that would put anyone's "life at risk" the only place I have heard that from is the feds themselves in an effort to label assange as a terrorist.



What I have learned is what most americans should already know. Our diplomatic policy and foreign relations is absolutely deplorable and our gov't is and should be held responsible for the "blowback" we as a nation have suffered through due to their horrible international hijinks.



These are the very consequences and blowback that Ron Paul and Chalmers Johnson have spoken at length about. There are consequences for our actions abroad, we've just never recognized them as such.



Most of the people I hear discussing the issue haven't done much reading, they've let the media spoon feed them the version that fits what they want to hear.

haha, I didn't even notice that, woops.

I just noticed that there are two "ass"es in "assassinated!"

and Maxt, from the speech I posted





LOL, JFK saw the Patriot Act coming 50 years ago.



Paypal said today that they were threatened by the feds if they didn't cut off the wikipedia paypal account. One can pretty much draw the conclusion from that, that Amazon, Easy DNS and others who were forced to stop dealing with wikileaks were also threatened.



The key is that it's not the information that wikileaks has released or the info that the feds already know he has, it's the info that they don't know about that scares the living **** out of them. They are guilty of crimes, so they all have something to worry about when an event like this takes place.



Back to your permanent slumber Americans, move along nothing to see here.

The problem is like all Americans, you are only looking at it with an American perspective, and only the damage done in America.. Not all governments abide by the same laws as the west, and Wikileaks has leaked info that has put people in other countries at risk. Its only a matter of time till something is leaked that put perhaps masses at risk. This particular leak was Americentric, but other ones haven't been. While the US like you say has done wrong with foreign policy, and as a Canadian I have seen misguided US foreign policy, I do think there has to be some secrecy within when it comes to internal operations. America is protectionist, wow big news..

LOL I don't have a world perspective, really?



OK Maxt show me the documents that put foreign nationals at risk. I assume you wouldn't make these claims without some knowledge about it, would you? Give me the links, the documents are public, which ones specifically put foreign nationals and nations at risk,? You have worldcentric view and have obviously read through a great deal of the documents that I haven't, so I'd like to see some of these documents posted up here so you can open my mind.



Typical canadian perspective, you assume because your passport is canadian and mine is american that you have a better grasp or world politics than I. Americans know nothing outside the confines of the US, if you honestly think that about me then fine, but you are incorrect.



As I stated, I read through a great deal of the documents, naturally I only read the ones in English, I'm working on my Norwegian, but there weren't any in Norwegian anyhow.



Again, i'm fairly confused how me discussing the country in which I hold citizenship's foreign policy is lacking in world perspective, it would seem to me that someone who lacked world perspective wouldn't give two shits about their nations foreign policy, most americans don't even know we have a foreign policy.

Read away...



http://www.ottawasun.com/comment/col.../16453756.html

Most American don't even realize there is an entire world out there..

LOL, thanks.

Oh I forgot to mention, when Obama came to town my father in law works at the base he landed at. He looks like your typical biker and he was told that only " people of a certain type would get to meet the president"



Pretty shitty if you ask me

Only an Americentric person would say something like that. Canadians don't even mention it when Stephen Harper snubs them, they immediately look at each other and talk about the fact that China is raising their interest rates in order to strengthen their dollar so the chinese can afford rising food prices. In fact look in a canadian newspaper, there's absolutely no news regarding Canada, it's taboo to even mention the goings on in canada, it's such a slippery slope, you start reporting on canadian issues and next thing you know they'll be canadiacentric and they'll have crazy laws like ones that require that at least 35% of content on the radio is entirely canadian, that's when you know a country has become _____centric. and give it some ******* acronym like MAPL ha ha get it "MAPLE".



Tico's LOVE to talk politics, next time I'm talking to one of them I'm going to look him strait in the eye and say "That's SO Central Americentric" all you're concerned about is what's going on in central america.

"read away" really? It's small blog post, that sarcastic op-ed was all you needed to be convinced assange had caused the deaths of people all over the world with his whistleblowing?



LOL I just re-read the first few lines in that canadian article you sent me. Well actually calling it an article is a bit much, it's a guys blog EZRA LEVANT, I checked his blog, he doesn't link to the documents and has no sources. consider the source, anyone else that wants to, here's the blog that the "story" was pulled from. It's an op ed, all his appear to be, there aren't any sources for any of his "posts". http://ezralevant.com/ You don't honestly consider an article written like that as news do you?

Quote:

---

Wikileaks' original mandate was to expose repressive countries such as China, Russia and Iran. But Assange vetoed that. He's all about being anti-American.

---

HA HA holy **** you linked an article after calling me "Americentric" that started with that? REALLY????? He gets to roll like that cause he's canadian huh?

it's like the premise of the article is that Assange is umm well anti-AMERICAN, he's criticizing the fact that assange IS anti america almost as if I dunno it's all about how assange effects..... wait for it america, I criticized american foreign policy and I'm the Americentric???? So to criticize america is americentric and to defend it is not? Uhh, ok i guess that makes sense to you and the blog post is used to reinforce this claim? I'm confused.



What I said was in regards to the documents I read, I only commented on the documents I read as that is the only true facts available to me. I didn't discuss articles that I had read bending the information as fact. I stated from the get go, that of the articles I had read, none of them had put anyone in danger, that's a fact you cannot dispute. Since I read english, most of the documents I read were in regards to US dimplomacy, again since that was all I read, that was the only thing I commented on.



There's really only two things for you to disagree with me on as these are the only two items I brought up 1) what i read did expose people to risk (it did not and you can't prove otherwise as you weren't standing over my shoulder reading with me) or 2) From what I have read so far I don't think he should be declared a terrorist by the us gov and hunted as such. Those are the only two statements I made regarding the topic at hand, I didn't claim to have read it all, I clearly said based on what I have read of the documents.



Apparently because I don't think the guy should be declared a terrorist and hunted as such I'm an Americentrist. However, if I had any understanding of how the non western world would treat the exposed people, I would want the us gov't to declare him a terrorist and hunt him at all cost. let's see how has that worked out in the past? Oh yea quite well, other nations are down right giddy when we show up to hunt people we've deemed a threat on their soil. Yea I'm the one with little understanding of the rest of the world lol Actually it would appear that very little evidence is needed, he's a potential threat, a couple people have said so, let's get him end of story. What's familiar about that?



admittedly it's the first time I've had someone claim to be a libertarian in one breathe and in the very next applaud using the expanded powers of the gov't, which is exactly what declaring him a terrorist does, give the us gov't carte blanche to invade and chase anyone labeled as such.

i've traveled to 34 foreign countries so far... i've decided that i'm just gonna be Me-centric now.

I'm donut centric lol

That's the beauty of the Americentric label, there's no way to refute it. You hold an american passport, therefor you are automatically americentric. Even if you quoted a canadian word for word, because you are american you cannot refute your americentrism. It's just like a neo con saying you aren't a patriot, as soon as you disagree with anything they present to you as fact, you are no longer a patriot. It cannot be refuted, it is therefor you are. However if you are a conservative canadian activist (self proclaimed I presume) then you can talk about how things effect america all day long and not be americentric, it is impossible to be americentric if you aren't american and it is impossible not to be americentric if you are.



Personally I don't know about Assange, I have some reserves about the guys character and motives. Will there be some collateral damage from his actions yes, but it IS the truth, it isn't lies, thats reality.



Time will tell, but things aren't as black and white as the neo cons and lieberman seem to think they are. Our antics abroad over the past 40 years has resulted in reprocusions, proven ones, ignoring them, acting like they don't exist solves nothing and more people will die, more americans will die from this "blowback".

Its funny how you define it and dont see the irony.. Look at your first responses on the issue, its all about us and we in America and how are government is screwing us, none of you gave a rats ass about Wikileaks until it gave you some political fodder to use in your context within your own political world.. Now he has outed that gee wow, the US government is manipulative, its become a libertarian soap box.. Gimme a break..

If his message changed to show your side of the coin, you'd be all over him as well...

Like I said first, I am torn over it internally. I like a transparent government, but I also do see the need for state secrets, and private matter of fact conversations.. You can't be all nice and politically correct all the time, you have to be able to call a spade a spade sometimes...And every government does really have its own interests at heart, big surprise..

As Canadian I am supposed to be insulted that the CIA thinks Canadians are soft touches, the left here is all up in arms about that, and Ezra Levant is right, its a big deal here with the Canadian left and Assange is the hero because its a nice way to demonize America as an ENTIRE whole entity, thats whats anti american about it. You criticize American foriegn policy because you hate your government and some of the establishment, not your country.. There is a pretty big difference there..

Ezra Levant is probably the biggest free speech activist this side of the 49th so it pretty comical for you to question his articles..lol



But its an ugly fact that there are things needed be done in societies that the public has no appetite for..

You are no better, that's my point. Your enlightened "world centric" view has brought up very little that isn't in regards to the US. The very article you used to support your statements is Americentric, far more so than any statements I have made.



You make broad assumptions about me personally based on very limited fact, but that appears to be your MO, what you can't refute with fact you refute with pigeon holing. The reality is and i've said it before, the documents I read pertain to the US, unlike you I don't speak of what I haven't read and don't know. That apparently makes you more world centric. Again, you live in Canada, I'm sure you'll deny it, but a great deal of the news you read and the topics you discuss relate to Canada, why? Because that's where you live, that's what should concern you the most.



Like I said previously there is absolutely no way I can win. If I said something negative about another nations foreign or domestic policy you would say "Typical American, thinks he has the right to comment on every other nations dealings, but doesn't even look at the things his own country does" if i say something negative about the US, well then it's "typical american, he doesn't think about the rest of the world."



Anyhow, this isn't much of an argument. You never address anything I say, you brush me aside because I'm american, it doesn't matter what I say you are quickly able to discount it as oh he's an american.



Again a broad assumption about me that isn't true. So you can prove that I never mentioned or read wikileaks prior to this issue? I know you can't cause it isn't true. I first started reading wikileaks a couple years back when they released a bunch of documents from 9/11. again that still make me americentric as I can't read anything in regards to the US or comment on it without being americentric.



I assume you never criticize the canadian gov't? You only criticize foreign gov't? because if you were to ever criticize the canadian gov't and hold yourself to the same standard you would be Candiacentric, the very act of doing so or even discussing your gov't in general makes you only concerned about Canada, in fact if you even mention the issues in Canada, you've walled yourself in, you are only concerned about Canada.



Again, prior to calling me americentric you never brought one fact to the discussion in regards to how anything effected other nations, you still haven't LOL you just keep pointing the finger at me. If you are so concerned about the other nations security, policy etc.... bring some of it to light, let's discuss it. Let's discuss the items in the documents that have no mention of the US



So here's your opportunity, you tell me. What issues in the documents should I be discussing? What documents should I read from the wikileaks website?

This I assume is the post you feel was "americentric".

Quote:

---

i've read through a great deal of the documents and seen nothing that would put anyone's "life at risk" the only place I have heard that from is the feds themselves in an effort to label assange as a terrorist.



What I have learned is what most americans should already know. Our diplomatic policy and foreign relations is absolutely deplorable and our (the US) gov't is and should be held responsible for the "blowback" we as a nation have suffered through due to their horrible international hijinks.



These are the very consequences and blowback that Ron Paul and Chalmers Johnson have spoken at length about. There are consequences for our actions abroad, we've just never recognized them as such.



Most of the people I hear discussing the issue haven't done much reading, they've let the media spoon feed them the version that fits what they want to hear.

---

You would have to be totally ******* blind to not realize that the vast majority of the documents that have brought this whole thing to the worlds attention are in regards to the US and therefor it would be nearly impossible to discuss the topic without the large majority of the discussion involving the US. As you proved quite well with your link, the rest of the world is discussing america's deplorable foreign policy and the ramifications of it. You can read the guardian and a plethora of other foreign news sources to quickly realize that. I'm having the same discussion the rest of the world is, I am however forced to discuss as a citizen of the nation in the hot seat.



As a matter of fact I was just discussing wikileaks with an Iranian friend of mine, actually he lives in australia and was exiled from Iran at a young age. Anyhow of course the discussion revolved mostly around the terrible light that it paints the US foreign policy. Now I know what you are thinking, me being americentric steered the conversation in that direction. Yea that would be a safe assumption in some cases, but anyone who knows Babak knows you aren't gonna "steer" any conversation you have with him, he's the driver! My point is, it would be completely impossible to discuss the topic at hand without discussing american foreign policy, end of story. The leaks themselves are from US embacy cables, how pray tell do you discuss US embacy cables without discussing the US foreign policy? lol The cables themselves provide for the most part only a US perspective, even the light it sheds on foreign nations is in reality a direct product of US foreign policy.



My neighbor is dutch, the guy across from him German (the germans LOVE to talk politics). I spent a lot of time with a lot of folks who have traveled the world, who come from other countries, a close friend from Scotland, I talk to friends from costa rica and argentina on a weekly basis and talk to friends from norway even more often then that and while usually we talk about much more than US politics when we are discussing politics, since this wikileaks story has broken, the discussion at hand has been the picture it's painted about the US gov't, it's undeniable fact that a great deal of the world is now discussing the US's foreign policy and have discussed it LONG before the wikileaks documents, even here on this forum.

Quote:

---

What I have learned is what most americans should already know. Our diplomatic policy and foreign relations is absolutely deplorable and our gov't is and should be held responsible for the "blowback" we as a nation have suffered through due to their horrible international hijinks.

---

You wouldn't label a person from any other nation who made that statement as Americentric, you would agree with them and say "yea i've seen the damage their horrible foreign policy has done" or something to that effect, but because I am discussing the current topic being discussed all over the world you discount what I say as Americentric.



One would think that someone with such a worldcentric view would try to enlighten the mindless masses with the true story, what the wikileaks discussion should really be about, but you've made no effort to do so. you've simply stated, not proved your views of the issue as being more worldly, not because you've brought facts to the discussion or because you've outlined a more worldly view of the issue... no your view is simply more worldly because you are canadian and because I american. So inform me, what's the topic that americans should be discussing in regards to these documents. What should I be discussing with my foreign friends? Foreign media is printing essentially the same article the US media is. Maybe the reality is not that I'm "Americentric" but that you are far more worldly then myself and the rest of the world. I'm going along with the rest of the world and discussing the wrong things, enlighten me, show me the way. You haven't provided any insight with your worldly perspective. Instead, I'm forced to take your word for the fact that you have a far greater grasp on the world as a whole, on the topic at hand as a whole.

From the guardian, http://www.guardian....bles-key-points



Follow the link, pretty much EVERY bullet is in relation to us foreign policy in some form, this is a foreign paper. Each day out of several bullets it's difficult to find any of them in regards to the documents that doesn't have some reflection on us foreign policy, this goes on and on all discussing us foreign policy. Their saying the same things I did LOL If the details they are outlining aren't with the intention of painting a horrible US foreign policy then what conclusion do you draw from them. Out of the literally hundreds of thousands of documents, the best you were able to dig up was an article that mentions the effect on what, one other nation? Venezuela is the only nation mentioned on it's own merit in the article you linked, everything else relates in a very direct way to US foreign policy. Apparently the entire world is discussing the wrong topic, since an "Americentric" view can logically only be held by an American, what is these other peoples issue? Are they just stupid? Uninformed? Why are they discussing and making essentially the same statements as me?

Thanks Ron Paul, looks like I'm in good company https://www.nopistons.com/forums/pub...DIR#>/wink.gif



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywoIn...layer_embedded