News0 min ago
Time now to close down Wikileaks
52 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/3y3b8ru
So the Afghan president Hamid Karzai dismissed British forces as 'not up to the task.
And U.S. general Dan McNeill - who led Nato forces in Afghanistan in 2007/08 - is said to have been 'dismayed' by a British effort which 'made a mess of things' in Helmand.
And Helmand governor Gulab Mangal is also said to have criticised British troops for failing to get out of their bases and engaging with local people.
Failing to get out of their bases? how is it then so many troops were killed in Helmand? because they 'WERE OUT OF THEIR BASES'.
How do you think this makes our troops who have served numerous dangerous tours out in Helmand feel, and what of the families of those that died, how will this disclosure make them feel?
When is this vile Wikileak site going to be closed down, and most of all when are our media going to stop helping them to promote their damaging gossip?
If it was a site highlighting racist views likely to cause racial disturbances, a site encouraging vile acts against children, or a site encouraging terrorism, etc. etc. It would have been closed down long ago, and rightly so.
But this site remains open, and the media continues to broadcast it's wares, unlike of course, when they join together and are careful what they report, in case it offends certain sections of the community.
So the Afghan president Hamid Karzai dismissed British forces as 'not up to the task.
And U.S. general Dan McNeill - who led Nato forces in Afghanistan in 2007/08 - is said to have been 'dismayed' by a British effort which 'made a mess of things' in Helmand.
And Helmand governor Gulab Mangal is also said to have criticised British troops for failing to get out of their bases and engaging with local people.
Failing to get out of their bases? how is it then so many troops were killed in Helmand? because they 'WERE OUT OF THEIR BASES'.
How do you think this makes our troops who have served numerous dangerous tours out in Helmand feel, and what of the families of those that died, how will this disclosure make them feel?
When is this vile Wikileak site going to be closed down, and most of all when are our media going to stop helping them to promote their damaging gossip?
If it was a site highlighting racist views likely to cause racial disturbances, a site encouraging vile acts against children, or a site encouraging terrorism, etc. etc. It would have been closed down long ago, and rightly so.
But this site remains open, and the media continues to broadcast it's wares, unlike of course, when they join together and are careful what they report, in case it offends certain sections of the community.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The Swiss will not be bullied by the US ... not into ANYTHING.
The Swiss don't need the US, are not allied to them, and have most of the World's gold and currency reserves stored in their banks.
And tonight ... I will be there ...(yay) ... giving their casinos a good hiding.
=0)
If anyone needs any of that US money, I will be bringing it home on Sunday.
The Swiss don't need the US, are not allied to them, and have most of the World's gold and currency reserves stored in their banks.
And tonight ... I will be there ...(yay) ... giving their casinos a good hiding.
=0)
If anyone needs any of that US money, I will be bringing it home on Sunday.
I had to laugh when an a US Official admitted that up to 3,000,000 US Government workers (right down to the Immigration guy at the airport) had access to most of these documents.Is it any wonder that Wikileaks got hold of them.
As Dave says,the US would be better installing burglar alarms and grills,and door locks on their systems,rather than blaming the burglars for walking into an open house.
The US Government doesn't know the difference between security and interferring censorship.
As Dave says,the US would be better installing burglar alarms and grills,and door locks on their systems,rather than blaming the burglars for walking into an open house.
The US Government doesn't know the difference between security and interferring censorship.
-- answer removed --
True to form as always.
On one hand you defend in the name of free speech,an internet site that (if you took the time to really think about it without going off on your rants), could cause serious diplomatic situations, that in turn could affect us all, yet on the other hand, you will go to all lengths to try and stop some of my posts, and some ABers you have got banned.
You will also condemn the Daily Mail time and time again, you will also criticise the 'Red Tops' for their needless 'celebrity gossip' and yet here is a site that continues to spout out it's damaging gossip, (that as said before could cause diplomatic tensions between countries), and more unconfirmed gossip that belittles our own troops.
All I can conduce from this that you support free speech and open debate, just as long as it fits into your own particular agenda. And since no one has brought this up, I presume you would not also wish to close down the other types of sites I have mentioned?
On one hand you defend in the name of free speech,an internet site that (if you took the time to really think about it without going off on your rants), could cause serious diplomatic situations, that in turn could affect us all, yet on the other hand, you will go to all lengths to try and stop some of my posts, and some ABers you have got banned.
You will also condemn the Daily Mail time and time again, you will also criticise the 'Red Tops' for their needless 'celebrity gossip' and yet here is a site that continues to spout out it's damaging gossip, (that as said before could cause diplomatic tensions between countries), and more unconfirmed gossip that belittles our own troops.
All I can conduce from this that you support free speech and open debate, just as long as it fits into your own particular agenda. And since no one has brought this up, I presume you would not also wish to close down the other types of sites I have mentioned?
A typical, rather silly and immature response from Invictas.
/// Oh yes,
Let's close down EVERYTHING that lets us the public know just what goes on in reality.///
Did I say this? NO, but I think in your case it might be a good idea, (a little knowledge in the wrong hands and all that)
/// Censor EVERYTHING and keep us in the dark.///
Did I say this? NO, but do you think there should be no censorship, and the public should know everything?
/// We mustn't know ANYTHING must we.///
Did I say this? NO, I won't add anything to this, it says it all.
/// God help us if YOU were in charge of the internet. ///
All I can add to this is, God help us if YOU were in charge of anything.
/// Oh yes,
Let's close down EVERYTHING that lets us the public know just what goes on in reality.///
Did I say this? NO, but I think in your case it might be a good idea, (a little knowledge in the wrong hands and all that)
/// Censor EVERYTHING and keep us in the dark.///
Did I say this? NO, but do you think there should be no censorship, and the public should know everything?
/// We mustn't know ANYTHING must we.///
Did I say this? NO, I won't add anything to this, it says it all.
/// God help us if YOU were in charge of the internet. ///
All I can add to this is, God help us if YOU were in charge of anything.
hey AOG, slight issue - closing these sites down shows that the governments and people that want them closed either don't want free speach at all or want it only when it suits them - I'm guessing the latter - which is basically what you accuse other ABers of. your question suggests you want to limit free speach in some way. The issue is, as i said in my last post, you can't have it both ways. Too much polotics about what shoudl and shouldn't then be said. Just wouldn't work.
True though that many tensions could and probably will be caused by these sites. Do we ban free speach just in case? trust that the people in power will deal with these sensibly? or accept that free speach comes with issues that we have to manage? Only the second option is pretty although i suspect extreemly unlikely.
What would your choice be?
True though that many tensions could and probably will be caused by these sites. Do we ban free speach just in case? trust that the people in power will deal with these sensibly? or accept that free speach comes with issues that we have to manage? Only the second option is pretty although i suspect extreemly unlikely.
What would your choice be?
some of the troops in Afghanistan were using land rovers that wouldn't have been considered safe in parts of NI. There weren't enough soldiers in Hellmand.
Wikileaks seems to be telling the truth here.
The saying: 'Lions led by donkeys' seems as true about the men and women in Afghanistan as it did in WW1.
Wikileaks seems to be telling the truth here.
The saying: 'Lions led by donkeys' seems as true about the men and women in Afghanistan as it did in WW1.
wikileaks isn't endangering anyone's national security with this low grade diplomatic tittle tattle so no need for knickers to get in a twist.
The only cost is in embarassment for diplomats and politicos involved so i suppose outrage at wikileaks should be in proportion to how much one likes and respects diplomats and politicos (who mostly have pretty thick skins anyway).
It also makes the americans look pretty stupid and inept but that's not telling anyone anything new.
.
The only cost is in embarassment for diplomats and politicos involved so i suppose outrage at wikileaks should be in proportion to how much one likes and respects diplomats and politicos (who mostly have pretty thick skins anyway).
It also makes the americans look pretty stupid and inept but that's not telling anyone anything new.
.
sandyRoe
That was news that was widely broadcast, even the Generals were complaining over this. It did not need sites like Wikileaks to gossip about it., all useful information handed over free to the enemy.
I am sure that this could have been perfectly discussed within the relevant departments, so as to come up with a solution by the experts, who are after all the ones to know about resources and troop deployment figures etc..
It did not need the tickle, tackling public to know, do you really think that they carry any force?
Be practical, would we even be out in Afghanistan if public opinion carried any weight?
That was news that was widely broadcast, even the Generals were complaining over this. It did not need sites like Wikileaks to gossip about it., all useful information handed over free to the enemy.
I am sure that this could have been perfectly discussed within the relevant departments, so as to come up with a solution by the experts, who are after all the ones to know about resources and troop deployment figures etc..
It did not need the tickle, tackling public to know, do you really think that they carry any force?
Be practical, would we even be out in Afghanistan if public opinion carried any weight?
Why shoot the messenger Wikileak? They have done us a service by showing how out of depth British forces are in Afghanistan and we are just punching above our weight. Our generals are at fault often saying the war is being won when it isn't. If this doesn't hasten our depature then nothing will. Its a shame we had to lose so many soldiers because of bravado by the generals.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.