Movie: We Steal Secrets

Has anyone else seen this? Pretty good flick.

I feel bad for Bradley Manning. That Julian Assange is a character. Phone Post 3.0

It's on direct tv. Phone Post 3.0

wikileaks ain't happy about this movie LOL

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/06/20136895652601426.html

We Steal Secrets': The new film about WikiLeaks infuriates WikiLeaks
A new documentary about WikiLeaks has put the transparency organisation up in arms.

Interesting, I just looked it up in the DirecTV guide search and It's listed, but "There are no matching programs at this time." Not available on demand, either.

Was it a one-time showing on a specific channel?

The Adversary - Interesting, I just looked it up in the DirecTV guide search and It's listed, but "There are no matching programs at this time." Not available on demand, either.

Was it a one-time showing on a specific channel?
Just on On Demand Phone Post 3.0

TTT I didn't realize this movie was so obscure. It's a cool documentary on wiki leaks. Phone Post 3.0

"I feel bad for Bradley Manning"

Why? Phone Post 3.0

pfsjkd - "I feel bad for Bradley Manning"

Why? Phone Post 3.0
He saw our government do bad shit and told the world. How are we going to choose our leaders if we don't really know the damage were doing to ourselves and others?

Would you rather it just continues? Phone Post 3.0

KDK1CallingKDK12 - 
pfsjkd - "I feel bad for Bradley Manning"

Why? Phone Post 3.0
He saw our government do bad shit and told the world. How are we going to choose our leaders if we don't really know the damage were doing to ourselves and others?<br />
<br />
Would you rather it just continues? <img alt="Phone Post 3.0" border="0" src="/images/phone/apple.png" style="vertical-align: middle;" /></blockquote>

If you wanna look at it like he had the moral high ground when he egregiously violated the UCMJ by releasing massive amounts of classified information, that's at least a viewpoint that I can sorta respect even though I disagree with it.

But with great power comes great responsibility. I don't give a thin damn how much moral high ground you may think you have, if you take that road you'd better be prepared for the consequences. If he honestly knew the price and was willing to pay it then he doesn't need sympathy. He made an informed (albeit stupid, IMO) choice. If he didn't really realize the price, then he's a 24 karat dipshit, in which case he doesn't need sympathy any more than the dumbass who walks into a liquor store and kills the clerk over $50 and ends up getting a needle in his arm. 

It's a nice thought to throw open the doors of secrecy in an effort to root out corruption, but it's a naive idea at best and weakens us at worst.

pfsjkd -
KDK1CallingKDK12 - 
pfsjkd - "I feel bad for Bradley Manning"

Why? Phone Post 3.0
He saw our government do bad shit and told the world. How are we going to choose our leaders if we don't really know the damage were doing to ourselves and others?<br />
<br />
Would you rather it just continues? <img alt="Phone Post 3.0" border="0" src="/images/phone/apple.png" style="vertical-align: middle;" /></blockquote>

If you wanna look at it like he had the moral high ground when he egregiously violated the UCMJ by releasing massive amounts of classified information, that's at least a viewpoint that I can sorta respect even though I disagree with it.

But with great power comes great responsibility. I don't give a thin damn how much moral high ground you may think you have, if you take that road you'd better be prepared for the consequences. If he honestly knew the price and was willing to pay it then he doesn't need sympathy. He made an informed (albeit stupid, IMO) choice. If he didn't really realize the price, then he's a 24 karat dipshit, in which case he doesn't need sympathy any more than the dumbass who walks into a liquor store and kills the clerk over $50 and ends up getting a needle in his arm. 


It's a nice thought to throw open the doors of secrecy in an effort to root out corruption, but it's a naive idea at best and weakens us at worst.

If it motivates positive change in our foreign policy I don't think it weakens us one bit. If anything it strengthens us in the long run especially when it comes to useless, senseless and wasteful wars. Phone Post 3.0

KDK1CallingKDK12 -
pfsjkd -
KDK1CallingKDK12 - 
pfsjkd - "I feel bad for Bradley Manning"

Why? Phone Post 3.0
He saw our government do bad shit and told the world. How are we going to choose our leaders if we don't really know the damage were doing to ourselves and others?<br />
<br />
Would you rather it just continues? <img alt="Phone Post 3.0" border="0" src="/images/phone/apple.png" style="vertical-align: middle;" /></blockquote>

If you wanna look at it like he had the moral high ground when he egregiously violated the UCMJ by releasing massive amounts of classified information, that's at least a viewpoint that I can sorta respect even though I disagree with it.

But with great power comes great responsibility. I don't give a thin damn how much moral high ground you may think you have, if you take that road you'd better be prepared for the consequences. If he honestly knew the price and was willing to pay it then he doesn't need sympathy. He made an informed (albeit stupid, IMO) choice. If he didn't really realize the price, then he's a 24 karat dipshit, in which case he doesn't need sympathy any more than the dumbass who walks into a liquor store and kills the clerk over $50 and ends up getting a needle in his arm. 


It's a nice thought to throw open the doors of secrecy in an effort to root out corruption, but it's a naive idea at best and weakens us at worst.

If it motivates positive change in our foreign policy I don't think it weakens us one bit. If anything it strengthens us in the long run especially when it comes to useless, senseless and wasteful wars. Phone Post 3.0
I see. So should ANYTHING be classified? Phone Post 3.0

pfsjkd -
KDK1CallingKDK12 -
pfsjkd -
KDK1CallingKDK12 - 
pfsjkd - "I feel bad for Bradley Manning"

Why? Phone Post 3.0
He saw our government do bad shit and told the world. How are we going to choose our leaders if we don't really know the damage were doing to ourselves and others?<br />
<br />
Would you rather it just continues? <img alt="Phone Post 3.0" border="0" src="/images/phone/apple.png" style="vertical-align: middle;" /></blockquote>

If you wanna look at it like he had the moral high ground when he egregiously violated the UCMJ by releasing massive amounts of classified information, that's at least a viewpoint that I can sorta respect even though I disagree with it.

But with great power comes great responsibility. I don't give a thin damn how much moral high ground you may think you have, if you take that road you'd better be prepared for the consequences. If he honestly knew the price and was willing to pay it then he doesn't need sympathy. He made an informed (albeit stupid, IMO) choice. If he didn't really realize the price, then he's a 24 karat dipshit, in which case he doesn't need sympathy any more than the dumbass who walks into a liquor store and kills the clerk over $50 and ends up getting a needle in his arm. 


It's a nice thought to throw open the doors of secrecy in an effort to root out corruption, but it's a naive idea at best and weakens us at worst.

If it motivates positive change in our foreign policy I don't think it weakens us one bit. If anything it strengthens us in the long run especially when it comes to useless, senseless and wasteful wars. Phone Post 3.0
I see. So should ANYTHING be classified? Phone Post 3.0
Sure. Strategic operations carried out to the rule of law.

Innocent citizens being gunned down and blown up should be exposed. It apparently happens frequently without regard for consequences. Phone Post 3.0

^Ok, but Manning didn't only release info about controversial or possibly illegal activities. He released tons of other stuff too. Stuff that most likely puts human sources and operatives in danger. Phone Post 3.0

pfsjkd - ^Ok, but Manning didn't only release info about controversial or possibly illegal activities. He released tons of other stuff too. Stuff that most likely puts human sources and operatives in danger. Phone Post 3.0
If you watch the movie it states that even the US government admitted that mannings leaks had no such consequences. Phone Post 3.0

. Phone Post

KDK1CallingKDK12 -
pfsjkd - ^Ok, but Manning didn't only release info about controversial or possibly illegal activities. He released tons of other stuff too. Stuff that most likely puts human sources and operatives in danger. Phone Post 3.0
If you watch the movie it states that even the US government admitted that mannings leaks had no such consequences. <img alt="Phone Post 3.0" border="0" src="/images/phone/apple.png" style="vertical-align: middle;" /></blockquote>

I haven't seen the movie, but who do they cite in the govt maki g that claim? Cause I found this:

The White House issued a statement saying the leak "put[s] at risk our diplomats, intelligence professionals, and people around the world who come to the United States for assistance in promoting democracy and open government".

And this....

Clinton, representing the U.S. State Department, said, "This disclosure is not just an attack on America's foreign policy interests ... it is an attack on the international community: the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity ... It puts people's lives in danger, threatens our national security and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems."

Sounds to me like the govt absolutely is saying he endangered people and ops. And there's really no way he vetted 700,000 documents himself to ensure he was only releasing stuff that wouldn't put anyone else in danger.

‘No proof’ that Manning leaks ‘were dangerous to US security’

http://rt.com/op-edge/bradley-manning-leak-security-141/ Phone Post 3.0

TTT Phone Post 3.0

^Debatable whether he did or didn't endanger people since none of us has read all the info he released.

My point was that I think it's silly to believe that the govt's stance is that he didn't endanger anyone. What govt source in the movie claims this? I'd bet that it's not any kind of official spokesperson.

And the rt.com link is weak at best. Again, outsiders who haven't seen all the shit he released aren't very credible when it comes to saying that he didn't endanger anyone.

pfsjkd -


^Debatable whether he did or didn't endanger people since none of us has read all the info he released.



My point was that I think it's silly to believe that the govt's stance is that he didn't endanger anyone. What govt source in the movie claims this? I'd bet that it's not any kind of official spokesperson.



And the rt.com link is weak at best. Again, outsiders who haven't seen all the shit he released aren't very credible when it comes to saying that he didn't endanger anyone.

I'm sure if he did endanger anyone the government propaganda machine would of pushed it in the news.

Ill believe RT over any establishment news source any day. Phone Post 3.0