Who is "leaking" to Wikileaks?

[Renew Deal]

Who is the leaker? Did the latest info come from Bradley Manning? And why hasn't Assange been criminally charged? Isn't it illegal to mishandle confidential government information?

EDIT: I am looking for answers to the questions. I am not interested if you personally support the leaking of the information.

[Poll_Blind]

1. Maybe we need a WikiLeaksLeaks?

:shrug:

PB

[Pavulon]

4. For what? (nt)

[AlabamaLibrul]

2. Kick and unrec, because this time it's worth it. n/t

[Renew Deal]

5. huh?

:shrug:

[AlabamaLibrul]

7. I support Wikileaks and would hope that anyone against this war (and not just worried about

President Obama possibly being embarrassed) would be thrilled that these sorts of documents are finally coming out.

The official word is that some of this stuff will harm our relations with our allies. The only reason it would do that is if the US isn't being on the up-and-up with them, and those foreign actors deserve to know how they got screwed just like the rest of America did.

[Pavulon]

8. So fucking up diplomatic communications

with states not even involved in the war is relevant how?

[niyad]

10. you believe everything the govt mouthpieces tell you?

[Pavulon]

12. you believe everything the fight the man US is source of all evil crowd feeds you?(nt)

[niyad]

14. having been around as long as I have, pretty much know this for myself, thank you.

[AlabamaLibrul]

16. It's their friendship, not mine. I'd rather know my wife was cheating, and had a little black book

documenting all of her extramarital sex, even if it took a third and fourth party for me to find out about it.

Ignorance is bliss, but the truth matters.

[Pavulon]

21. yep but who your neighbors wife is fucking in none of your concern.(nt)

[Renew Deal]

22. Nor who is palpating her labia.

:evilgrin:

[Pavulon]

23. Waiting for a mm wave picture of Paris Hilton's coke filled panites to hit TMZ

it will be epic.

[Incitatus]

27. I'm a sucker for government transparency. nt

[Renew Deal]

15. OK, and how does that answer the questions I posted?

It seems that your original response is intellectually dishonest. You have no interest in the details as long as it supports your world view.

[AlabamaLibrul]

24. My response is how I feel. Take it however you will.

Who is the leaker?
Dunno. But like Shaggy said.... it wasn't me!

Did the latest info come from Bradley Manning?
See above

And why hasn't Assange been criminally charged?
Dunno. My thought is that they know the insurance file is going to cause some shit far beyond anything we've seen if he gets arrested. I've got money on small plane crash.

Isn't it illegal to mishandle confidential government information?
I'm sure it is.


Since you added the edit that you're interested in answers and not how I feel, sure. He's committing a crime along with whoever leaked the documents.

I also supported the Chicago Eight and "Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers", so I support Assange and praise the leaker. I like keeping those in power on their toes, knowing that we're watching them to. Some people disagree with me and don't like that. Such is life.

[Renew Deal]

29. Thanks

I'm really wondering where the info came from.

[Pavulon]

3. More complex. Assange (and crew) are a military problem now.

Manning will be charged for what he leaked and die in federal custody a long time from now like the other scum that has done the same things he did (pollard). Assange is a figurehead, the worker bees may or may not be targeted for acting as an intelligence agency. Intelligence agencies are generally backed by states that protect them from bad things.

Assange's status as a non-citizen removed protections afforded to Bradley. These people will be treated according to their residency and how the other agencies choose to handle them.

It could be as simple as the US signaling they will not protect these people from others impacted.

[Ian David]

6. I'll admit it. I am the leak. n/t

[laughingliberal]

17. I thought as much.

:)

[NuclearDem]

26. I'm Spartacus

Er, the leak. :evilgrin:

[donco6]

31. I've taken a leak - does that count?

:)

[niyad]

9. if, in fact, manning IS the leak, the question is, "how does a low-ranking person have access to all

that classified material?" doesn't seem likely that a 23-year-old non-com really had all that access.

[Pavulon]

18. Boy, easy to tell someone who has never experienced Army stupid.

as a former victim (who also disliked the army at times) the stupidity is far beyond what you would believe.

He was in an intelligence MOS, apparently once cleared no one bothered to check up on his myspace or IRC activity.

[Dr.Phool]

28. I had a high (top secret) clearance as a 18 year old E-3.

All kinds of really stupid shit gets classified. The scary thing is, that on occasion, they would forget to classify something and send it out over an unclassified teletype. (this was 1969). Stuff like how much we spent on nuclear weapons that year.

[Renew Deal]

30. Is the work still all done by people?

Or is there an automated screening process now? I imagine it would be better to classify everything first and declassify as necessary.

[Renew Deal]

19. I agree

I think the questions lead there.

[NuclearDem]

25. Yeah, I actually agree with Pav on this one

Anyone in an intelligence job in the military has access to a lot of classified information. Even low-ranking people have access to some serious stuff. I know--I had an intel job too.

[Rex]

11. Dick Cheney?

He needed something to do with his 9 billion dollar bunker HQ. I just can't believe this is going on without some part of the US govt helping out. Why? No idea, they could shutdown the flow of traffic (govt) and have not so I wonder why? And what the FUCK is going on with North Korea? Bad timing.

[TheKentuckian]

13. Hopefully enough to make a difference

[Renew Deal]

20. What?

People are speaking in riddles these days.

[ljm2002]

32. Why hasn't Assange been criminally charged?

Who do you think would be charging him? You do realize that he is not a U.S. citizen, right? He is not under the jurisdiction of the U.S. government, so were you thinking some other government would be charging him? Which government would that be? And what constitutes "mishandling confidential government information"?

Wikileaks provides a platform, and whistleblowers take advantage of the platform to reveal information. Those who do the leaking put themselves at risk by doing so. But once a newspaper receives information, regardless of its source, they are free to publish it. In general, in this country, we do not have prior restraint on what can be published. That is at the heart of what we mean by a "free press". Wikileaks is arguably a media organization. They certainly rely on established media organizations, including the New York Times, to publish their information. In any case they are not themselves subject to U.S. law so the point is moot in that regard.

[Andy823]

33. Good question.

I find it amazing that most people here don't seem to care. Someone on other tread mentioned that it's probably those left over from the Bush years who are still working for different agencies. While I know things are pretty screwed up in government, I find it very hard to believe all of this is coming from one low ranking individual. I see a whole lot of posts today about these leaks, and the vast majority are since Obama took office. I am sure that there are plenty more that implicate Bush, but it seems odd that the ones getting posted here basically seem to point at Obama and Hillary. Makes me wonder also who is really doing the leaking!