Too late now. By the way it won’t do them any good as copies of the document were sent to 4 or 5 countries top Newspapers.

Fact: The sheer amount of data he has leaked should narrow the search for the culprit because downloading media leaves a large footprint. Is there something else that can be gained with this material being leaked?

Beck was RIGHT again. LOL

skyfet escaped again. Someone call the institution.

My GOD, do these people in this Administartion think we’re that stupid? Listen to what this man is saying.

He actually wants us to believe that they didn’t stop the site because the ducuments would just cause some “awkward and embarrasing moments”. WHAT?

THEY DIDN”T KNOW WHAT ASSANGE HAD. How can they use this justification?

This is a cover-your-ass excuse. If they could have stopped this, they should have. They didn’t. They’re either complacent or totally incompetent – or both. But, hey, that’s their story and they’ll stick to it. Don’t worry, little peasant.

This is pathetic.

How was Beck right?

This, coupled with these two posts I saw from Don Surber, I think Surber is right…
It was about getting rid of Hillary as a threat in 2012.

2. From Jack Shafer of Slate: “The leaked cables make it impossible for Hillary Clinton to continue as secretary of state.”

Now we know why they were leaked — to rid Barack Obama of a rival.

Don’t ever forget, this regime does not really care much about the country.

EVIL.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/25794#more-25794

Wikileak’s target is Hillary

The Wikileaks scandal is not that it was leaked but it is a blatant attempt to eliminate Hillary Clinton as a threat to Barack Obama’s re-election.

That is the only conclusion that I can reach upon reading this from Time magazine:

Hillary Clinton, Julian Assange said, “should resign.”

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/25812#more-25812

Becareful of what Jon writes. He’s been know to misrepresent the facts.

As @skyfet said, once the newspapers had the data, the barn door was already open and I’ll add that not only would a take down of Wikileaks been seen as an affront to press freedom, but because they also release or are in possession of documents obtained from other countries, there will be and probably has been a time that they’ve been useful to an American effort.

Also, if I might go a step further: Wikileaks has a following and access to resources that could possibly defend against a preemptive strike and if one were to be undertaken, as the sympathetic hackers and black hat community learned of the cyber-command’s methods, they would become less useful in the future.

If you only have a couple of bullets, you’re not going to waste them on the unarmed guy in the corner.

@gordonbloyershow
Perhaps your constant reference to mental hospital is a projection. I think you just see my name and quote stupid stuff, there’s no doubt that I was right in my comment, am sorry I have no cure for what’s bothering ya.
Capiche?

Harry Flashman said:
My GOD, do these people in this Administartion think we’re that stupid? Listen to what this man is saying.

He actually wants us to believe that they didn’t stop the site because the ducuments would just cause some “awkward and embarrasing moments”. WHAT?

THEY DIDN”T KNOW WHAT ASSANGE HAD. How can they use this justification?

I may be wrong, but my recollection is that the leaker had passed the CD to a friend in Cambridge and perhaps they were in possession of the original data and even if they weren’t, one would assume that there’s some kind of record of the information available to Private Manning and who knows, by now, he may have even talked.

Probably better that ALL the stolen diplomatic cables be released — including ones that make the US and Israel look good, and the ones that show which of our alleged allies have been lying — rather than let the New York Times decide what is newsworthy.

However, PFC Bradley Manning, after a fair trial and conviction for espionage, needs to be hanged by the neck until dead. Whether they are at the bottom of the military chain of command, or in the top echelons of the State Department or CIA, they need to know that the consequences are severe.

Shutting down the Wikileaks website itself doesn’t mean shit in the bigger picture. There are literally millions of different sites and avenues they can use to distribute the information.

Shutting access to ONE of those websites does absolutely ZERO to prevent the information from going public. Anyone that knows anything about the internet knows this.

The dipshits at Fox like Beck and Kelly know they’re talking to an audience of geriatric 80-year old dumbfucks, so they’re trying to imply that shutting down Wikileaks would solve the problem and no leaks would have occurred, which is of course complete bullshit.

Grandma will believe anything the people on FOX tell them, so this is their way of laying blame on Obama. Transparent and stupid.

Ted Stevens is yelling from his grave that YOU JUST HAVE TO CLOSE THE TUBES!!!!

J Baustian said:
Probably better that ALL the stolen diplomatic cables be released — including ones that make the US and Israel look good, and the ones that show which of our alleged allies have been lying — rather than let the New York Times decide what is newsworthy.

However, PFC Bradley Manning, after a fair trial and conviction for espionage, needs to be hanged by the neck until dead. Whether they are at the bottom of the military chain of command, or in the top echelons of the State Department or CIA, they need to know that the consequences are severe.

Hell, why not just dismantle him piece by piece with dull scissors? While pouring hydrochloric acid in his wound? The bloodthirst in this country explains a LOT. Bring back the draft. Have everyone share in the sacrifice of war. Then see how bloodthirsty we are as a nation.

sarainitaly said:
This, coupled with these two posts I saw from Don Surber, I think Surber is right…
It was about getting rid of Hillary as a threat in 2012.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/25794#more-25794

Wikileak’s target is Hillary

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/25812#more-25812

Generally, an informed paranoiac quotes from Wikipedia instead of blogs.

All the Marys in Heaven! You source a blog?

If the “author” were correct, he must suffer greatly from myopia. The leaks were much, much grander than Hillary! alone.

What’s next? Since Randi the Witch wants to vote for Hillary! this is all a cunning effort to get back at Randi herself.

Egads!

I agree with Sarainitaly.
Even Dick Morris, who nodoubt hates Hillary, essentially agreed. This will only be an issue if ( Dick says when) Hillary runs for President.

sarainitaly said:
This, coupled with these two posts I saw from Don Surber, I think Surber is right…
It was about getting rid of Hillary as a threat in 2012.

My God, I never understood how insane you were until this post.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
My God, I never understood how insane you were until this post.

Fact: God doesn’t help those who don’t try to help themselves freeloader!

I hope they leak the Bank scandal!

Especially, since banks and credit card companies have shut us out!

Shut down WikiLeaks? Perhaps “You Lie!” hussein can bow (again) to his bankers, the Chinese, and ask them to shut it down. They seem to be pretty good at hacking and other nefarious internet stuff.

I’m not sure which is a bigger embarrassment to the Obama administration, the documents that were leaked by WikiLeaks, or the President’s half-baked response to the situation. Can you imagine how FDR would have handled a security leak such as this during World War II? Or Truman or Kennedy or Reagan during the Cold War? How far we have fallen!

gordontheblowhardwithashow says:
“Beck was RIGHT again. LOL”

That’s right, like a broken clock, twice a day.

mcf1757 says:
“How was Beck right?”

BECK: “We have DHS – Department of Homeland Security – seizing websites because they’re selling fake Prada handbags. Really?!”

Except for one detail that Beck got wrong. Cyber Command does not function under the DHS; it’s under Pentagon control. So, Gordon, the blow hard with the show, Beck wasn’t quite right about this either. See? Beck can’t even get the time right twice a day. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cyber_Command

Petition: Fire Glenn Beck, the liar, hypocrite an buffoon.
http://jewishjustice.org/webform/petition-murdoch

Hey Gordon, the blow hard with a show, the Dow went up 249 points today, right in line with Beck’s assertion that the “perfect storm” has begun. Oh, wait, just the opposite of what Beck claimed…again.

GlennBeckReview said:
Hey Gordon, the blow hard with a show, the Dow went up 249 points today, right in line with Beck’s assertion that the “perfect storm” has begun. Oh, wait, just the opposite of what Beck claimed…again.

This must be the perfect calm before the perfect storm. lmfao

So I guess when Hillary said, “It puts people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems,” she misspoke. Got it.

======\\\ http://www. betterwhol es al er.us///===========
handbag $33

AF tank woman $17

puma slipper woman $30

90X Extreme Fitness System ONLY ONLY 42$$$$$$$

I think Blair Hull, Jack Ryan, Alice Palmer, et al are fully aware of the lengths Obama will go to to eliminate his opponents.

@Harry Flashman “This is a cover-your-ass excuse. If they could have stopped this, they should have. They didn’t. They’re either complacent or totally incompetent – or both. But, hey, that’s their story and they’ll stick to it. Don’t worry, little peasant.”

Good summary of what I learned as a State Dept. FSO Pol/Military Officer in Saudi Arabia for almost four years. The DoD dudes really treated civilians as though they weren’t up to snuff and simply didn’t have the chops to understand the complexities of the various problems they were encountering. And in case after case, I found Flashman’s “complacent or totally incompetent” described the situation, and the condescension of many, not all, was palpable. Somebody told me back then that if you took the Pentagon phonebook and eliminated every third number at complete random, the efficiency of the place would improve by 50%, and that was from a study commissioned by DoD itself!!!

This administration is such a disgrace. The DOJ doesn’t think twice about literally confiscating websites without so much as a letter for selling knock off Gucci bags, but when it comes to our national security they don’t really give a damn.

sarainitaly says:
“I think Blair Hull, Jack Ryan, Alice Palmer, et al are fully aware of the lengths Obama will go to to eliminate his opponents.”

“When allegations that Blair Hull had abused his ex-wife were reported in the media, Hull’s poll numbers dropped and he failed to win the nomination.[2] Illinois State Senator and future U.S President Barack Obama later became the nominee.

Jack Ryan (born October 6, 1959) is a Republican from the state of Illinois who was forced to withdraw from the 2004 United States Senate race due to an alleged sex scandal involving his relationship with his ex-wife, actress Jeri Ryan.[1][2] His eventual replacement, Alan Keyes, would go on to lose the general election to State Senator and future President of the United States, Barack Obama.

Obama challenged Alice Palmer’s hastily gathered nominating petitions and those of the three other prospective candidates. Nearly two-thirds of the signatures on Palmer’s nominating petitions were found to be invalid, leaving her almost 200 signatures short of the required 757 signatures of registered voters residing in the Senate district; neither of the other three prospective candidates had the required number of valid signatures, leaving Obama, who had filed nominating petitions with over 3,000 signatures on the first filing day, as the only candidate to earn a place on the March 1996 Democratic primary ballot.”

So, Sara, if Obama is such a hardball player in the game of politics, as you suggest, why isn’t he using Cyber Command to stop the Wikileaks site? Maybe he doesn’t want to be remembered in history as Richard Nixon II.

you forgot to include that the Dems/Obama camp were leaking the stories on the divorces.

GlennBeckReview said:
So, Sara, if Obama is such a hardball player in the game of politics, as you suggest, why isn’t he using Cyber Command to stop the Wikileaks site? Maybe he doesn’t want to be remembered in history as Richard Nixon II.

you didn’t read my post above, did you?

sarainitaly says:
December 1, 2010 at 2:55 pm (Quote)

Harry Flashman said:
My GOD, do these people in this Administartion think we’re that stupid? Listen to what this man is saying. He actually wants us to believe that they didn’t stop the site because the ducuments would just cause some “awkward and embarrasing moments”. WHAT? THEY DIDN”T KNOW WHAT ASSANGE HAD. How can they use this justification? This is a cover-your-ass excuse. If they could have stopped this, they should have. They didn’t. They’re either complacent or totally incompetent – or both. But, hey, that’s their story and they’ll stick to it. Don’t worry, little peasant. This is pathetic.

If you don’t think the Pentagon knew what he had in the document dump before it went live you know very little about how the system works. It is beyond me how so many people are so Sarah Palin like, i.e. throw something out that has no fact or support.. Just a off the wall comment. Where and how did you come up with this conclusion?

sarainitaly said:
This, coupled with these two posts I saw from Don Surber, I think Surber is right…
It was about getting rid of Hillary as a threat in 2012.

There is new study out that 1 out every 5 Americans suffer from some type of mental illness. Anyone that would believe this has to be 1 of those 5. This is about a paranoid as it gets. Where does this stuff come from? Lord help us.

Truth means nothing to people who get their knickers in a twist panting after the scandal, the hatred, the personal insults…..complete waste of time trying to get past their propaganda wall…….When they finally get the government they are campaigning for, I hope the people who could fix it just let them swing in the wind…….peasants laboring in the fields of the bankers and corporations, Hard labor. No benefits. Tents if they are lucky. One meal a day, if lucky, once again. They will be screaming for an Obama to help them out of the pit of despair……. Just like I wish a repug had taken the recent elections…..so they could clean up their own mess nearly forty years in the making……if i were not wiping away the tears, i would be having one heckuva laugh over the prospect of Spend and Bill repugs in charge again.

Guess what. What Wikileaks is doing probably isn’t illegal, any more than it was illegal for the New York Times to publish The Pentagon Papers. Very hard to prosecute a news outlet – even if it is “one guy with a laptop”., Illegal to steal the stuff? Absolutely. Illegal to publish it? I doubt it. There is this pesky thing called the !st Amendment to the Constitution, Freedom of the Press. Good advice to the government: If you don’t want to see it in print, don’t lose control of it in the first place. The government can’t even claim copyright violation, since most government documents cannot be copyrighted. So, tough luck, DOJ.

Sure, they “could have”. However, shutting down the tens of thousands of individuals who are bypassing the site completely and simply passing along the torrent containing the cable archive? That would have been a bit more difficult, and a bit more messy.

Caution: Wisdom is infinite.
Surely, aside from each and everyone of you, an extremely lethal level of ignorance persists. This is unfortunate as well, although there are more important matters at hand. WikiLeaks, regardless of what it does, may only affect the private sector & the Government; whom may only claim to represent the people, as our world knows that by knowing of our great Constitution. On the other hand, Facebook with all its private sector might, can retrieve entire identities of everyone using it (i.e Partiot Act), and that’s a ton of people. Evidently, Wikileaks receives all of the harsh attention, not by the people, but by the powerful private sector, as this is clearly due to where the Government’s priorities truely are, over its people. Presumably, from historical events, these priorities are not in favor of the people at all. Theoretically, these priorities will see to it that this man, the founder of WikiLeaks will be either made prisoner or killed, unless he agrees to something (pertaining to a secret agenda) with the private sector/Government etc.
Thank you for your time, although it is clearly not an honor with all these Glenn Beck worshipers.

sarainitaly said:
“This, coupled with these two posts I saw from Don Surber, I think Surber is right…
It was about getting rid of Hillary as a threat in 2012.”

Truth says:
“There is new study out that 1 out every 5 Americans suffer from some type of mental illness. Anyone that would believe this has to be 1 of those 5. This is about a paranoid as it gets. Where does this stuff come from? Lord help us.”

Thank you Truth. (That’s a weird thing to type.) Sara believes that Obama knew in advance what exactly was going to be in the dumped documents.

Sara, I think they have psychotherapists in Italy or Dumfukistan or wherever you are. I’d make an appt.

Harry Flashman:

WRONG!

The State Department, the Pentagon and the President all knew about the document leaks as far back as the Spring. And they definitely knew about it by late June because that’s when they arrested the person who downloaded the data and passed it to WikiLeaks (for absolutely no personal gain).

What we have here is the most embarrassing thing an Imperialistic power can face a conscientious objector with the high (moral) ground. That’s the reason for the outright propaganda and hyperbole coming from Washington.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/10/17/wikileaks/index.html
http://wlcentral.org/node/379

Snidely said:
Guess what. What Wikileaks is doing probably isn’t illegal, any more than it was illegal for the New York Times to publish The Pentagon Papers. Very hard to prosecute a news outlet – even if it is “one guy with a laptop”., Illegal to steal the stuff? Absolutely. Illegal to publish it? I doubt it. There is this pesky thing called the !st Amendment to the Constitution, Freedom of the Press. Good advice to the government: If you don’t want to see it in print, don’t lose control of it in the first place. The government can’t even claim copyright violation, since most government documents cannot be copyrighted. So, tough luck, DOJ.

Snidely – you are somewhat correct. However WikiLeaks is not one person with a laptop and Julian Assange is an Australian. The part that is absolutely true is that Assange, nor anyone who works for WikiLeaks were responsible for the downloading of the information off of Government servers. It was one soldier with high a density rewritable CD.

And you are exactly right, WikiLeaks publishing this info is no different than the Pentagon Papers, which of course proved that the Vietnam War was based on a lie. Sound familiar?

The more they actively try to shut wikileaks fown, the more publicity it gets and the more people are wondering what the fuss is about and others end up mirroring it. Smarter to outwardly ignore it and pretend it’s no big deal.

ProgLib says:
“Smarter to outwardly ignore it and pretend it’s no big deal.”

No pretending is necessary. Wikileaks only has secret and confidential materials, not any top secret materials. Embarrassing? Yes. A threat to our national security? No. A threat to our contacts in Iraq and Afghanistan? Unfortunately, yes; and that’s why there’s a danger to those contacts and anyone who might want to cooperate with the U.S. in a war theater.

Johathan Schell just published a piece on Beck in The Nation. From that is this:

“How seriously should Beck’s charges be taken? It would be comforting, relying on his clownishness, to assess Beck’s whole career as nothing more than the political equivalent of professional wrestling: a fraud tacitly understood by all to be a fraud, signifying little that is more troubling than some coarse amusement. After all, one would not, in a further extension of the mirror effect, want simply to unthinkingly turn Beck’s outlandish accusations around and aim them thoughtlessly back at him. On the other hand, Beck’s undoubted centrality in the present moment requires that he be taken seriously. There is no doubt that he has injected into American life one of the most virulent and dangerous sorts of accusations of which there is record. His smears mark the first time in recent memory that a major network has leveled anti-Semitic charges in a calculated campaign. History never repeats itself exactly, but the record of conspiracy theories would seem to provide at least some warnings that deserve to be taken to heart: political fantasies based on conspiracy theories are dangerous. Beware gifted hysterics who make things up. That usually ends badly.”

Does anyone really need to understand why I’ve given up a lot of leisure in my life to pursue this freaking maniac?