In the news today (North American version)

The reason I was monitoring 4 or so of them at a time was to see if they were consistent with each other and they were which told me what I was seeing was the truth and real.

Am I wrong to think it is unAmerican to be FOR Wikileaks?

Am I wrong to think it is unAmerican to be FOR Wikileaks?

Quite the statement.

Edward Snowden and Julian Assange are not patriots! They are working against the USA!

[JLP]

Edward Snowden and Julian Assange are not patriots! They are working against the USA!

Well they appear pro Trump so he would say not.

Well if it's proven that Trump has been in Putin's pocket, doesn't that make HIM unpatriotic and even treasonous?

Edward Snowden and Julian Assange are not patriots! They are working against the USA!

Assange is Australian, for a start.

Assange has no loyalty; he simply believes in complete freedom of information. He's completely amoral. That's okay in a way - it means no one is safe from him and he probably can't be bought. But it also makes him dangerous and unpredictable. Like - you feel he'd probably leak the nuclear codes if he got hold of them.

Yes that's right that Assange is Australian. What I meant to say is that the Americans who approve of Wikileaks--Trump and Republicans--are unpatriotic and treasonous for approving of these dangerous actions!

Am I wrong to think it is unAmerican to be FOR Wikileaks?

Funny that the left praised Wikileaks when they exposed Bush during and after the Iraq war.

10 years ago, WikiLeaks became famous for exposing elements of the Bush administration and the Iraq wars, and quickly became heroes to the left. This year, Hillary Clinton is being exposed because of the unprecedented levels of corruption throughout her history. Julian Assange, who is not necessarily pro-Trump, has stated that if any controversial Trump material is found, it will be published. However, everything controversial they have has already been said by Trump himself, according to Assange.

http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/

The Iraq War documents leak is the disclosure to WikiLeaks of 391,832[1] United States Army field reports, also called the Iraq War Logs, of the Iraq War from 2004 to 2009 and published on the Internet on 22 October 2010.[2][3][4] The files record 66,081 civilian deaths out of 109,000 recorded deaths.[3][4][5][6][7] The leak resulted in the Iraq Body Count project adding 15,000 civilian deaths to their count, bringing their total to over 150,000, with roughly 80% of those civilians.[8] It is the biggest leak in the military history of the United States,[2][9] surpassing the Afghan War documents leak of 25 July 2010.[10]

The UN's chief investigator on torture, Manfred Nowak, states that "if the files released through WikiLeaks pointed to clear violations of the United Nations Convention Against Torture the Obama administration had an obligation to investigate them."[25] The Convention, according to Nowak, forbids the US from turning over detainees to the Iraqi government, if doing so meant they might be subjected to torture.[25]

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay said that "the US and Iraq should investigate claims of abuse contained in files published on the Wikileaks website". In addition, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak called "for a wider inquiry to include alleged US abuses."[26]

Other
NATO's Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen stated that the release could cause "a very unfortunate situation", and that "such leaks ... may have a very negative security impact for people involved." US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also condemned the leak, saying that it "puts the lives of United States and its partners' service members and civilians at risk."[27] WikiLeaks dismissed these concerns.[28]

Countries
In preparation for the leak, the Pentagon created an Information Review Task Force, comprising 120 people led by the Defense Intelligence Agency.[27] A spokesperson for the Pentagon said the reports were considered to be simple observations and reports by military personnel and civilian informants, but nevertheless called their release a "tragedy," and the US Department of Defense requested the return of the documents.[29] WikiLeaks founder Assange dismissed the Pentagon's concerns that the publication of the documents could endanger US troops and Iraqi civilians, asserting that the Pentagon "cannot find a single person that has been harmed" due to WikiLeaks’ previous release of documents related to the US-led war in Afghanistan.[28]

The U.S. military responded to the information in the documents about civilian deaths, saying that "it did not under-report the number of civilian deaths in the Iraq war or ignore prisoner abuse by Iraqi forces". Pentagon spokesman Colonel Dave Lapan added that "the U.S. military never claimed to have an exact count of the number of civilians killed in Iraq."[30] He also added that both WikiLeaks and the Pentagon had the same database to collate a civilian death toll and was further sceptical WikiLeaks "made any new discovery." General George Casey, the army chief of staff, said US forces went to morgues to collect data and he did not "recall downplaying civilian casualties."[31]

And on and on and on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_documents_leak

Yes that's right that Assange is Australian. What I meant to say is that the Americans who approve of Wikileaks--Trump and Republicans--are unpatriotic and treasonous for approving of these dangerous actions!

So now I am committing treason because I appreciate what Assange has done? Snowden, too? And it's better to let our government or any other government in the world do some damming, illegal things against their own citizens and citizens of the world to be "patriotic" to the USA officials who have committed these crimes, even if those crimes are definitely treasonous? Just sweep it under the rug and play dumb?

ETA:

Oh yea, and if someone is a Republican, that's treason?

This country is run on a 2 party system, just to remind you.

BTW, I am not registered to ANY party!

Back in the Bush/Cheney days, I was arguing with diehard Republicans on townhall.com and other right wing websites that the invasion of Iraq based on lies was going to set back our country and our world for decades. I had no idea how devastating it would continue to be that even succeeding administrations were going to be trapped in a no win situation.

My problem now with Trump and his group of nefarious alt right buddies is that they are selling out our country to Russia and it probably is for monetary gain. There are too many secret alliances going on behind the scenes!

Back in the Bush/Cheney I was arguing with diehard Republicans on townhall.com and other right wing websites that the invasion of Iraq basest on lies was going to set back our country and our world for decades. I had no idea how devastating it would continue to be that even succeeding administrations were going to be trapped in a no win situation.

My problem now with Trump and his group of nefarious alt right buddies is that they are selling out our country to Russia and it probably is for monetary gain. There are too many secret alliances going on behind the scenes!

The Clinton Foundation already beat him to it and sold 20% of our Uranium to Russia by running off and putting in prison, the ranchers in Oregon.

Hillary sold 20% of America’s uranium to Russia as SoS, Clinton camp worried that the deal is being investigated
​
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/286
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/225

"It's out there."
​
This isn’t a smoking gun leak (since the Grassley letter was posted publicly) but it shows the Clinton campaign's nervousness about this incredibly damning story being investigated.
‘Uranium One’ explanation: As Secretary of State, Hillary approved the transfer of 20 percent of America’s uranium holdings to the Russian state-owned firm ‘Uranium One’, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation. She literally sold off a rare and prime material used in nukes to a country we are at odds with for cold hard cash. John Podesta also has ties to Russia exposed through the WikiLeaks, owning 75,000 shares in a Putin-backed energy company.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... y-company/

I don't believe anything posted on Breitbart or included in the Peter Schweitzer "Clinton Cash" book/movie!

It is outrageous that Steve Bannon is Trump's chief advisor!

I don't believe anything posted on Breitbart or included in the Peter Schweitzer "Clinton Cash" book/movie!

It is outrageous that Steve Bannon is Trump's chief advisor!

Only one source is Breitbart - the rest are Wikileaks. And I'm not talking about movies...

The "Clinton Cash"' hit piece by Peter Schweitzer and produced by Breitbart CEO Steve Bannon which I watched on Fox Business Network, gave a dark, simplistic picture of the Clintons and the uranium deal. I saw Schweitzer in a live interview afterwards and he admitted the uranium part was not accurate, but the damage was done! We will never know what a Hillary Clinton administration would have been like, but the Trump one already looks like the opposite of what he was promising in a very loud, persuasive voice!