Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily Breeze.
#27 Dec 3, 2010
It says it is ok for family members or friends to go on the website and read the contents aloud in front of the employee who is banned from accessing the website personally.
This loophole pretty much makes the ban on the personal computer a joke. HA HA!
“If it ain't broke don't fix it”
Since: Jul 09
#28 Dec 3, 2010
Many, if not all, of the Wikileaks documents are classified documents. For military personnel to view classified documents without a need-to-know is against military regulations. Similarly, it is also against federal regulations for federal civil service employees and government contractors (such as Raytheon personnel) to view classified material without having a need-to-know.
Even if the personnel listed above did have a need-to-know, it would be illegal for them to view the material on their home computers. By telling these folks to not access this information at home, the government is simply protecting them from possible legal or disciplinary action for breaking rules they agreed to in order to gain employment with the government.
#29 Dec 3, 2010
The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.
After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own "Rules of Engagement".
Consequently, WikiLeaks has released the classified Rules of Engagement for 2006, 2007 and 2008, revealing these rules before, during, and after the killings.
WikiLeaks has released both the original 38 minutes video and a shorter version with an initial analysis. Subtitles have been added to both versions from the radio transmissions.
WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.
WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work.
Since: Sep 10
#30 Dec 3, 2010
So, the DoD (among other agencies) wants to slip from responsibility of maintaining security on its documents by telling the rest of the world to pretend they're not there? By threatening law abiding Americans instead of plugging their gaps and terminating Mr. WikiLeaks?
Sorry, but that's exactly the wrong way to go about it. Unless, of course, they intend to alienate the American public even more than they already have.
#31 Dec 3, 2010
The information on Wikileaks doesn't become declassified just because it was stolen and put on the web. As defense department subcontractors, companies like Raytheon cannot allow employees to access classified documents.
You wouldn't like the employees taking documents and selling them to the enemy because they are on the "own time" would you? Clocking out does not end the employees responsibility to follow the guidelines they agreed to at the time of hire.
#32 Dec 3, 2010
Our folks are not interested in such truths, they rather go with the flow, they have been raised that way. That's how select leaders are getting away with murder.
Even literally speaking.
#33 Dec 5, 2010
"There is not a crime, there is not a dodge, there is not a trick," said Pulitzer, and "there is not a swindle, there is not a vice which does not live by secrecy."
"Get these things out in the open, describe them, attack them, ridicule them in the press, and sooner or later public opinion will sweep them away. Publicity may not be the only thing that is needed, but it is the one thing without which all other agencies will fail."
And Raytheon wants to keep us silent?
On whose side are they on?
Add your comments below
|Pot legalization backers kick off California ca...||May '16||Go Blue Forever||3|
|Nancy Reagan through the years||Mar '16||Electra41||1|
|GOP bill blocks pregnant immigrants from enteri... (May '15)||Dec '15||Divorce Lawyer||29|
|Study: Democrats have more positive body langua... (Mar '15)||Nov '15||Lawrence Wolf||41|
|Bill Maher Smacks Media For Uncritical Coverage... (Aug '15)||Aug '15||Dee Dee Dee||1|
|Senate candidate Loretta Sanchez vows federal a... (Jun '15)||Jun '15||Bernard||1|
|Ex-Reagan speechwriter Dana Rohrabacher a big b... (Mar '15)||Mar '15||Get Over It||1|
Find what you want!
Search Dana Rohrabacher Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC