Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Wikileaks and the US State Department


Recommended Posts

Canada was not involved in the second war on Iraq .. maybe the first.

Maybe the first? Maybe the first????? Maybe you need WikiLeaks in Canada, eh?

So I've lost track of what your original point was. Can you refresh my memory?

The original point was that your slant on what is valuable/important does not reflect any universal theme or value system. It is yours....not ours...or theirs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 263
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Maybe the first? Maybe the first????? Maybe you need WikiLeaks in Canada, eh?

A wikileaks for Canada would not bother me. It would bring to light some of the shady stuff our government up here has been involved with. The dirty laundry needs to be displayed for all to see.

The original point was that your slant on what is valuable/important does not reflect any universal theme or value system. It is yours....not ours...or theirs.

You seem hurt. You ok?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A wikileaks for Canada would not bother me. It would bring to light some of the shady stuff our government up here has been involved with. The dirty laundry needs to be displayed for all to see.

Fine...that includes personal data. Are you game for that too?

You seem hurt. You ok?

I will always be OK....I can buy...Cocoa Puffs!

Link to post
Share on other sites
The original point was that your slant on what is valuable/important does not reflect any universal theme or value system.

Sure it does. Its called "representitive government". If a system government can keep things secret that would change how people vote, then representitive government cant work properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine...that includes personal data. Are you game for that too?

This really pisses you off doesn't it. Is there something in there about you we should know?

Government data should be secure (sure I'll agree to that), but should be open to investigation when things go wrong. What you see here is a massive failure on the US military for not having their secure data. But you can continue your transgressions on me if you wish.

I will always be OK....I can buy...Cocoa Puffs!

If you like eating garbage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was Head of Records Management in two government departments in Ottawa. Essentially, you're correct in your assumption. Generally, federal records are organized according to a numeric subject classification system. For example:

***************

In my experience, too many records were classified simply because some managers had an inflated view of the value of the program they administered and the paperwork they generated.

*************

Another thought. If this wikileaks business turns into a regular event, what's to stop some governments from planting information they want made public and then cry fowl over the leaks. How do we know this hasn't already taken place with some of the documents now made public?

My view is that diplomatic communications should be presumptively classified. There is a certain interest in the ability to communicate frankly and without political correctness consideration. I don't think that those communications were meant to be published.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This really pisses you off doesn't it. Is there something in there about you we should know?

Nope...I am much happier without my security clearances, information security duties, and investigations when something is compromised by a numb skull.

Government data should be secure (sure I'll agree to that), but should be open to investigation when things go wrong. What you see here is a massive failure on the US military for not having their secure data. But you can continue your transgressions on me if you wish.

It doesn't parse away that easily....try as you might. I agree that information security failed, but the same can happen for personal data, court records, health information....hell, it has already happened many times.

If you like eating garbage.

See the petition to get Cocoa Puffs for Canada:

http://www.petitiononline.com/cocoapuf/petition.html

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is that diplomatic communications should be presumptively classified. There is a certain interest in the ability to communicate frankly and without political correctness consideration. I don't think that those communications were meant to be published.

I share that view as far as private communications between diplomats about local hairstylists or escort services etc but I have the exact opposite view about things the public has a stake in, like the attitudes of our allies towards human rights and their actions when they run contrary to these.

It should be the law that these sorts of communications find their way into the light of public srutiny asap.

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is that diplomatic communications should be presumptively classified. There is a certain interest in the ability to communicate frankly and without political correctness consideration. I don't think that those communications were meant to be published.

There is a certain interest in the ability to communicate frankly and without political correctness consideration.

That may be so but that shouldnt outweigh consideration of the fact that they would be more professional, cause less problems, and serve our interests better if they felt they were accountable to us. What you do is give them a limited window... they can keep stuff secret for say one year after which an independant review of the documents would decide which ones really do pose a threat to national security, and which ones should be released under the FOI act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That may be so but that shouldnt outweigh consideration of the fact that they would be more professional, cause less problems, and serve our interests better if they felt they were accountable to us. What you do is give them a limited window... they can keep stuff secret for say one year after which an independant review of the documents would decide which ones really do pose a threat to national security, and which ones should be released under the FOI act.

They shouldn't be able to keep things like their knowledge of our allies torturing and murdering people secret for a year.

We need an audit system that is much tighter and quicker than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...