Is Obama to Blame for WikiLeaks?
SodaHead Politics
2010/12/06 22:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
100 votes
|
|
41% | |||
|
118 votes
|
|
48% | |||
|
27 votes
|
|
11% | |||
Does former House Speaker and possible 2012 presidential candidate Newt Gingrich believe that current president, Barack Obama, is so powerful that in less than two years he was able to weaken the national security computer system?
Apparently so. Gingrich, on Fox Sunday said that the Obama administration was amateurish when it came to the WikiLeaks disclosures. And that it deserves a large share of the blame for the massive amounts of classified information revealed through WikiLeaks.
"You have a private first class who downloads a quarter million documents, and the system doesn't say, 'Oh, you may be over extended?' I mean, this is a system so stupid that it ought to be a scandal of the first order. This administration is so shallow and so amateurish about national security that it is painful and dangerous," he said.
WikiLeaks, a website run by Julian Assange and a host of supporters, obtained millions of documents detailing the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well as confidential State Department cables and then released them. An Army specialist, who has been arrested, is alleged to have downloaded the documents.
Apparently so. Gingrich, on Fox Sunday said that the Obama administration was amateurish when it came to the WikiLeaks disclosures. And that it deserves a large share of the blame for the massive amounts of classified information revealed through WikiLeaks.
"You have a private first class who downloads a quarter million documents, and the system doesn't say, 'Oh, you may be over extended?' I mean, this is a system so stupid that it ought to be a scandal of the first order. This administration is so shallow and so amateurish about national security that it is painful and dangerous," he said.
WikiLeaks, a website run by Julian Assange and a host of supporters, obtained millions of documents detailing the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well as confidential State Department cables and then released them. An Army specialist, who has been arrested, is alleged to have downloaded the documents.
Top Opinion
-
Andrew1554 2010/12/07 02:18:42Yes
+10His incompetent response months ago just allowed it to get worse and worse, he's incompetent in everything he does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Stand with Daniel Ellsberg, Barbara Ehrenreich, Arundhati Roy, Noam Chomsky and others--sign FAIR's petition in support of Wikileaks today.
http://salsa.democracyinactio...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Posted on YouTube: December 12, 2010
By YouTube Member: WikileaksSwiss
Views on YouTube: 54
Posted on DU: December 12, 2010
By DU Member: Joanne98
Views on DU: 327
Operation Payback (is a bitch), this is the Internet, we run this. An open message from Anonymous to the governments of the world and their legal leeches regarding the motivation of the cyber protests.
Corrupt governments of the world, we are anonymous. For some time now, voices have been crying out in unison against the new ACTA laws. The gross inadequacies of the new laws being passed internationally have been pointed out repeatedly. Our chief complaint is that such measures would restrict people's access to the internet.
In these modern times access to the internet is fast becoming a basic human right. Just like any other basic human right, we believe that it is wrong to infringe upon it. To threaten to cut people off from the global consciousness as you have is criminal and abhorrent. To move to censor content on the internet based on your own prejudice is at best laughably impossible, at worst, morally reprehensible.
The unjust restrictions you impose on us will meet with disaster and only strengthen our resolve to disobey and rebel against your tyranny. ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Posted on YouTube: December 12, 2010
By YouTube Member: WikileaksSwiss
Views on YouTube: 54
Posted on DU: December 12, 2010
By DU Member: Joanne98
Views on DU: 327
Operation Payback (is a bitch), this is the Internet, we run this. An open message from Anonymous to the governments of the world and their legal leeches regarding the motivation of the cyber protests.
Corrupt governments of the world, we are anonymous. For some time now, voices have been crying out in unison against the new ACTA laws. The gross inadequacies of the new laws being passed internationally have been pointed out repeatedly. Our chief complaint is that such measures would restrict people's access to the internet.
In these modern times access to the internet is fast becoming a basic human right. Just like any other basic human right, we believe that it is wrong to infringe upon it. To threaten to cut people off from the global consciousness as you have is criminal and abhorrent. To move to censor content on the internet based on your own prejudice is at best laughably impossible, at worst, morally reprehensible.
The unjust restrictions you impose on us will meet with disaster and only strengthen our resolve to disobey and rebel against your tyranny. Such actions taken against you, and those you out source your malignant litigation too, are inevitable, unavoidable and unstoppable.
We Are Anonymous,
We Are Legion And Divided By Zero.
We Do Not Forgive Internet Censorship
And We Do Not Forget Free Speech.
We Are Over 9000,
Expect Us!
http://www.mysociety.org/proj...
in case you need someone to watch your backs..
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
i would venture to say the world is with you. thank you for your help with wikileaks!
citizen kane
Stand with Daniel Ellsberg, Barbara Ehrenreich, Arundhati Roy, Noam Chomsky and others--sign FAIR's petition in support of Wikileaks today.
http://salsa.democracyinactio...
Obama's folly is that he refuses to take on the GOPerconnazis and that will be his downfall.
Aren't you at all concerned about the additional $700 billion dollars that extending those tax cuts are going to cost?
And yes to question 2, but we have to realize that a lot of that will be recouped by the increase in jobs if the economy ever gets moving again. We need pro growth economic policies. The president taking the position, he was forced to take, was the first pro growth economic set of circumstances he's agreed to since being president. The health control law is still a liability to get employers to hire. It needs to be changed.
Incidentally the $700 billion in lost revenue over 10 years the administration claims it will lose will not even pay for "without interest" the Omnibus bill (8?? billion) that the president jammed down our throats and produced zero jobs. So, more important than worrying about revenue is stopping the wasteful spending.
Question 2 - These tax breaks have been in place for nearly eight years, now...how has that 'recouping' been working out for you, anyway?
The Omnibus bill saved over 2,000,000 jobs. Next?
You have a long way to go on the "common sense" front my friend.
Taxes are not being lowered! They have been this way for the past 10 years. How are they being lowered? Revenue NOT received by the government does not make it suddenly the governments money! How is it you do not see that?
Could you imagine if your company announced there would be no pay raise this year and someone goes up to the ceo and says, "you owe me 3% of salary"? The ceo will tell them not to let the door hit their ass on the way out! It was never the employees money, so how can they demand it?
Taxes are based on what you pay the year before, "temporary" is never part of the equation to what your tax rate is.
Since I own my company 'someone else' would not make that announcement. If one of my employees asked me for a raise and it was not in the cards, then I would explain it to him and tell him that it was not in the cards. It doesn't necessarily mean the employee isn't worth the raise, but that economy won't allow it to happen.
However, I understand that my employees make me more or save me more money than they are being compensated. I also understand that my tax bracket has NOTHING to do with whether or not I hire someone. If I have work which needs done and isn't getting done - or I have to pay someone overtime to get it done - then it only makes sense to hire another person. If I have a plan for expansion, then I might hire some people in hopes things will work out.
It is business.
However, my tax rate has nothing to do with it, because I am taxed on my income and my company is taxed on it's profit - which is figured AFTER all the employee expenses have been paid.
Lets try this again. If we need employees be...
Since I own my company 'someone else' would not make that announcement. If one of my employees asked me for a raise and it was not in the cards, then I would explain it to him and tell him that it was not in the cards. It doesn't necessarily mean the employee isn't worth the raise, but that economy won't allow it to happen.
However, I understand that my employees make me more or save me more money than they are being compensated. I also understand that my tax bracket has NOTHING to do with whether or not I hire someone. If I have work which needs done and isn't getting done - or I have to pay someone overtime to get it done - then it only makes sense to hire another person. If I have a plan for expansion, then I might hire some people in hopes things will work out.
It is business.
However, my tax rate has nothing to do with it, because I am taxed on my income and my company is taxed on it's profit - which is figured AFTER all the employee expenses have been paid.
Lets try this again. If we need employees because work isn't getting done OR isn't getting done in a cost effective way, we hire them. If we have a plan on expansion and ways to make more money, we hire employees to do the work.
We never hire employees because we have more after tax profits.
Actually, you know, this president is very smart. I still do not agree with anything of his philosophies, but he is smart. If this proposal would go through we would have a temporary economy in which business STILL probably will not hire. Business only want permanency, not temporary. Then, he could look back and say it didn't work, let's try MY way, all when capitalism never got a chance to work.
In regard to your comments about why there were not more jobs from the current tax structure we both know the answer to that and have been through it a 100 times before. The recession occurred due to Fan/Fred meltdown, which was a purely Democratic power play all the way back to Carter and the Community Reinvestment Act. Government meddling in the housing market caused the meltdown, not capitalism or tax breaks. That is fact. Do I have to prove that to you yet again?
Hiring an unnecessary employee can cause a company to go into the red. However, income tax never can, because by definition it is a tax on PROFIT and only takes a percent of it. Oh, and if a company goes in the red this year for hiring an employee, they not only not paying any taxes that year, they can carry that loss forward from three to fifteen years, depending on how they are structured.
I guess you never heard of Bush's "Ownership Society", or is this another case of convenient amnesia?
Anyway, how, exactly did the Ownership society play it's part in the financial crisis?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6...
http://www.newsweek.com/2008/...
It was Bush's plan to provide home ownership to every American.
George W. Bush pushed for home ownership even though the loan originators had no stake in them ever being paid back.
Bush and his cronies weren't worried about a financial meltdown, either, because they knew exactly what to do about it....the same thing that happened when his brother, Neil, helped crash the S&Ls in the 1980s.
Oh, and probably Bush remembered one of his economic classes at Harvard when they told him that economic depressions don't hurt the economic elites...they can just buy real property at bargain basement prices.
Don't you wish you could say the same?
And you say you deal in reality?