It is currently 04/28/24 3:01 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Go to page Previous  1, 2   Page 2 of 2   [ 37 posts ]
Author Message
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 7:22 am • # 26 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
jimwilliam wrote:
I hear Wikileaks is having a bit of a problem getting the documents out.

elaborate, plz


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 7:26 am • # 27 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
jimwilliam wrote:
Yes you do Oskar.  If it implicates only individuals it's no big deal but how do you undo entire policies, directions and election results?  As an analogy, let's use the Tom Delay conviction.  He may be punished but his actions have influenced the entire history of Texas and its citizens for gosh knows how long.  There's not going to be any do-overs for elections since 2002 or changes to the redistribution of districts.  The effect of what he has done is far wider than just money laundering and they won't go away or even change for long into the future.

Even if Chretin were bribed or threatened or whatever to get us into Afghanistan (and this is just an example with, hopefully, no basis in truth), there is no way to undo the fact we were there, are there and probably will remain there in some capacity for a long time.
That which is already done cannot be undone but I certainly DO want to know how we got to where we are and, hopefully, we can avoid getting into the same kinds of messes. However, if we simply ignore it all, how can we improve?

  


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 7:34 am • # 28 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/22/09
Posts: 9530
There was a report on CBC this morning that Wikileaks was experience a massive denial of service cyber attack.  Wiki has been communcating by Twitter.  However, apparently, several major news outlets from around the world already have at least some of the documents. 


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 7:43 am • # 29 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
oskar, while I agree knowing the 'who/how/when/what' is important [especially as learning tool], I can only give my opinion that the US has proven again and again that we don't learn from our mistakes ~ there is always some charming but deluded snake-oil salesman waiting in the wings to profit by preaching revisionist history ~ do you really believe Canada [or any other country] is that different? ~ the real problem I see is that 'improve' is a subjective word and concept ~

Sooz


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 7:51 am • # 30 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/22/09
Posts: 9530
What I wonder about is how one guy, a low level soldier at that, could get hold of all these millions of supposedly top secret documents let alone send them to Wikileaks. 


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 7:54 am • # 31 
Administrator

Joined: 01/16/16
Posts: 30003
That "low level soldier" may not even exist. Assange is/was a hacker.


Top
  
PostPosted: 11/28/10 10:24 am • # 32 
sooz08 wrote:
Again, I agree with you and Mac in theory, Sid ~ but as I've posted before, I don't think the time to do that is while we [that 'we' includes other countries as well as the US] are in active combat zones ~ I see the timing as upping the risk and danger to all troops ~

Sooz
Not to be too argumentive, but realistic:  when are we (or other countries) not "in active combat zones"?   


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/28/10 10:35 am • # 33 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/16/09
Posts: 14234
jimwilliam wrote:
There was a report on CBC this morning that Wikileaks was experience a massive denial of service cyber attack.  Wiki has been communcating by Twitter.  However, apparently, several major news outlets from around the world already have at least some of the documents. 

i got on this morning.


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/29/10 3:40 am • # 34 
User avatar
Editorialist

Joined: 01/20/09
Posts: 8188
I'm sort of wondering exactly HOW these supposedly casual, off-the record conversations that "don't represent official positions" get on the record so they can *be* leaked?


Top
  
 Offline
PostPosted: 11/29/10 4:37 am • # 35 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 42112
Chaos, a lot of initial brainstorming work is done electronically [email, FAX, cable] when the participants are thousands of miles away ~ not only by/in the government, but in business as well ~ we had many many many hoops to jump thru at work to protect [as best we could] the confidentiality of emails, FAXes, and documents [especially early drafts] ~ while the ultimate goal might not change, many times the 'end product' [in this specific scenario, the 'official positions'] don't even remotely resemble the initial starting points ~ reality is that people forget or ignore the fact that there is some degree of risk in everything we do ~ telephones can be tapped, computer systems can be hacked, and people talk indiscriminately ~

Sooz


Top
  
PostPosted: 11/29/10 5:48 am • # 36 
If someone can hack into a secure network and "leak" confidential documents, can't they much more easily forge them? I mean how trustworthy is such a source?

I suspect that the Russians have a lot more substantive reasons to mistrust us than the allegation that a U.S. diplomat referred to Putin and Medvedev as Batman and Robin.


Top
  
PostPosted: 11/29/10 6:33 am • # 37 
jimwilliam wrote:

We should just hope that all these leaks deal with is the State Department calling foreign leaders bad names, etc.  What happens, though, if those leaks actually point to U.S. interference in the internal politics of countries.  Suppose, for example, the documents showed that Canada's involvement in Afghanistan was outright purchased by a bribe to our Prime Minister of the time, Jean Chretin or that U.S. money was funneled to the Conservative party to help elect a U.S. friendly government. 

Basically, what I am saying is the effect of these documents may not be restricted to a few red faces in the State Department.



I said that earlier and no one commented. After Chretien said "no" to contributing to the then-pending invasion of Iraq, the US Commerce Department slapped heavy duties on Canadian lumber in contravention of NAFTA and the softwood lumber agreements already in place.  Three years and five billion stolen dollars later, it was only when our then-new prime minister Harper negotiated with the Commerce Department did we see some of that money (not all) returned.


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Go to page Previous  1, 2   Page 2 of 2   [ 37 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
© Voices or Choices.
All rights reserved.