Wikileaks.Follow

I'll wait until the usual proveyors of spin give me the Cliff's Notes version to decide.


I kind of want to see the new Luke Wilson movie, even though I'm 90% confident that it'll stink.

Jophed,




Obama gave the go ahead to have this info leaked.


This is only the beginning of the "leaks" that will come from seemingly "anonymous" sources in a transparent attempt to blame as much as they can on W before the mid-terms.


Do you really think Obama cares if something is considered "classified" if that something can in any way help the Democrats?

I read about this on CNN's site, apparently the government said none of the documents are a security risk so the guy who leaked shouldn't have to worry about a treason charge.

Lol. No clue where this information came from, but that's a pretty massive amount to just be some disgruntled office worker somewhere. I agree that whomever leaked this should be brought to justice and that the Pentagon should work to close the leak.

But on a purely conspiratorial note, it certainly does potentially buy the Obama administration some cover for the failings of foreign policy since he's taken office, ties well into the "We inherited this mess from Bush" angle, and frankly gives him a way to put out the word that Afghanistan is failing without having to say it himself. Obviously, it's pure tinfoil hat territory since there's no evidence of such a connection, nor is there any certainty that the fallout wont end out hurting the Obama administration even more anyway (most people don't distinguish between the Pentagon and the White house when it comes to leaks like this).

Intriguing to think about though.

I'd imagine the information leaked would have an influence on the charge, if not on whether the leaker would be charged.

*Shrug*

Actually, searching for the word "treason" on CNN's site turns up nothing except some stuff about tonight's Larry King Live.

Heh.

Not going to worry too much about "preemptive downplaying" when I can't find an article actually about it.

Does anyone on this board believe in democracy?

Huh?!

I may have gotten a bit ahead of myself on my "media to reader to forum telephone game" translator, but I doubt it was a "mistake".

Why make that point this early though? I don't know what the original CNN story was which prompted this whole bit, but I kinda immediately rejected the assumed point of the related bit that somehow this isn't a big deal because "it might not technically meet the criteria to be charged with treason!". I'll admit to perhaps getting ahead of the issue, but it seemed pretty obvious that the only reason to make that point would be if you were trying to downplay the significance of the act.

Maybe I'm a bit more cynical about media coverage (or how people relate media coverage) than most, but that was my take on it.

Because that's how the news works? You think they should sit on an aspect of the story so that conspiracy theorists like yourself don't get too excited?

As far as I know the guy is not an American citizen, so what the basis for "treason" would be is beyond my poor comprehension.

I haven't read enough or seen enough of the leaked material to comment any further.

"Making a point" to say it? You haven't read this article. It could have been a single line thrown in. It certainly wasn't the entire point of the article, like you're trying to make it sound.

The point of throwing it in is because it's news, nitwit. There doesn't have to be some ulterior motive to make a journalist want to cover every aspect of the story. It also gives details as to the nature of the information leaked, which the average reader would want. Of course, the average reader isn't a conspiracy theorist like yourself, determined to find any hint of liberalism in every aspect of life. Answer this, what does CNN gain by downplaying it? If the only answer you can come up with is some conspiracy about how the Democrats asked them to, then hint, you might need to adjust your thinking a bit.