Comments for The Waterglass http://thewaterglass.net Still at fifty percent. Fri, 03 Sep 2010 07:25:09 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 Comment on SOLARIS MAXIMUS by HANEYGlenna24 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375&cpage=1#comment-6150 HANEYGlenna24 Fri, 03 Sep 2010 07:25:09 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375#comment-6150 Don't have enough money to buy some real estate? Worry not, just because that is achievable to take the <a href="http://bestfinance-blog.com/topics/business-loans" rel="nofollow">business loans</a> to solve such problems. Thus get a car loan to buy everything you require. Don’t have enough money to buy some real estate? Worry not, just because that is achievable to take the business loans to solve such problems. Thus get a car loan to buy everything you require.

]]> Comment on SOLARIS MAXIMUS by jordan 11 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375&cpage=1#comment-6149 jordan 11 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:54:01 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375#comment-6149 that's really great news i never heard it before nice post look forward your new posts that’s really great news
i never heard it before
nice post
look forward your new posts

]]> Comment on “I just want to get my nose back:” Time Magazine’s Bid to Support the Aghanistan War by jordan 9 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3380&cpage=1#comment-6148 jordan 9 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:50:51 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3380#comment-6148 very nice post i like it thanks for sharing look forward new posts very nice post
i like it
thanks for sharing
look forward new posts

]]> Comment on WikiLeaks Called “Irresponsible” by Both Governments and Human Rights Groups by jordan 8 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3387&cpage=1#comment-6147 jordan 8 Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:47:42 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3387#comment-6147 The post is written in very a good manner and it contains many useful information for me. You have a very impressive writing style. Thanks for sharing. The post is written in very a good manner and it contains many useful information for me.
You have a very impressive writing style.
Thanks for sharing.

]]> Comment on WikiLeaks Called “Irresponsible” by Both Governments and Human Rights Groups by Chip Mango http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3387&cpage=1#comment-6134 Chip Mango Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:08:26 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3387#comment-6134 "Irresponsible" is the word they use when they can't arrest you for anything illegal. Cheers! “Irresponsible” is the word they use when they can’t arrest you for anything illegal.

Cheers!

]]> Comment on “I just want to get my nose back:” Time Magazine’s Bid to Support the Aghanistan War by Chip Mango http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3380&cpage=1#comment-6131 Chip Mango Thu, 05 Aug 2010 23:21:35 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3380#comment-6131 I think it's a little too late for that poor woman's nose. I hope that she can get another one, or a prosthetic of some kind. The ears are another matter entirely. Cheers! I think it’s a little too late for that poor woman’s nose. I hope that she can get another one, or a prosthetic of some kind.

The ears are another matter entirely.

Cheers!

]]> Comment on SOLARIS MAXIMUS by Joshua http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375&cpage=1#comment-6130 Joshua Thu, 05 Aug 2010 07:20:37 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375#comment-6130 The future will make plans for YOU, Chip. The future will make plans for YOU, Chip.

]]> Comment on SOLARIS MAXIMUS by Chip Mango http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375&cpage=1#comment-6129 Chip Mango Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:28:00 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3375#comment-6129 I'm having trouble making plans for the future, in light of this information. I’m having trouble making plans for the future, in light of this information.

]]> Comment on DefSec Gates Denounces Wikileaks Leak by Chip Mango http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366&cpage=1#comment-6128 Chip Mango Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:15:45 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366#comment-6128 Information regarding the 'orrible words one 'as to put into the anti-spam box on this website, like "scrotus." Cheers! Information regarding the ‘orrible words one ‘as to put into the anti-spam box on this website, like “scrotus.”

Cheers!

]]> Comment on DefSec Gates Denounces Wikileaks Leak by Joshua http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366&cpage=1#comment-6127 Joshua Tue, 03 Aug 2010 07:42:45 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366#comment-6127 What information is ok to leak, then, Chip? What information is ok to leak, then, Chip?

]]> Comment on DefSec Gates Denounces Wikileaks Leak by Chip Mango http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366&cpage=1#comment-6126 Chip Mango Tue, 03 Aug 2010 00:09:47 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366#comment-6126 Thanks, mate! Looks like there's all kinds of ambiguity here, like the right to know vs. the right for Poles and Yanks and Afghans to not be murdered by the Taliban because some amoral sucker of dead dog's arseholes thought it was "just" to leak information that puts them at risk. I won't charge you any quid for use of the scare quotes, mate. Cheers! Thanks, mate!

Looks like there’s all kinds of ambiguity here, like the right to know vs. the right for Poles and Yanks and Afghans to not be murdered by the Taliban because some amoral sucker of dead dog’s arseholes thought it was “just” to leak information that puts them at risk.

I won’t charge you any quid for use of the scare quotes, mate.

Cheers!

]]> Comment on DefSec Gates Denounces Wikileaks Leak by Joshua http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366&cpage=1#comment-6124 Joshua Mon, 02 Aug 2010 07:57:48 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366#comment-6124 I see this as a complex issue, Chip. While I approve of the idea of leaking secretive documents, the types of documents and the purpose of the leakers makes this complex. I don't know Assange's motivations. He said, "the method is transparency, the goal is justice," but this might be a cover for "the method is theft, the goal is anarchy." The balance between what is truly national security, and what the government says is national security but without much substance to the assertion, is real and difficult to navigate. We learn that governments cannot be totally trusted, yet, at the same time, we learn that some secrets the governments should keep. There is great ambiguity here that Wikileaks forces us to confront and think consciously about. On the human level, as opposed to the institutional level, there are serious ethical problems. Real people are put in real mortal danger because of a leaked military document: not just Americans, but Afghanis and Poles and others involved in the Afghanistan War. This is what makes the motivation of the leakers so important to have full knowledge of: could they have safely redacted the names on the documents, and other identifying information? If they did, would this be any different than what governments would release and, therefore, the value of the leaked document would lose its substantial value? I think that the leakers could have redacted some names without the leak losing substantial value, but since leakers rarely know which names to redact and which not to, they choose to do no redacting whatsoever. We can live in a world with Wikileaks, or we could live in a world without Wikileaks. Considering the technology available and the inability to control it, I don't think we have a choice. Is the world without Wikileaks a better, safer world? I doubt it. Wikileaks functions somewhat like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as a government watchdog. Unfortunately, Wikileaks does not have a clear code of conduct like HRW and Amnesty, which makes this situation much more uncertain. We are better off with government watchdogs, but we are better off only when the code of conduct is clear. In the end, I don't have a straightforward position on it, mostly because the ethics of it are very complex. What I like about it is that we are forced to confront these issues, and think about the world in which we live, and leak. I see this as a complex issue, Chip. While I approve of the idea of leaking secretive documents, the types of documents and the purpose of the leakers makes this complex. I don’t know Assange’s motivations. He said, “the method is transparency, the goal is justice,” but this might be a cover for “the method is theft, the goal is anarchy.” The balance between what is truly national security, and what the government says is national security but without much substance to the assertion, is real and difficult to navigate. We learn that governments cannot be totally trusted, yet, at the same time, we learn that some secrets the governments should keep. There is great ambiguity here that Wikileaks forces us to confront and think consciously about.

On the human level, as opposed to the institutional level, there are serious ethical problems. Real people are put in real mortal danger because of a leaked military document: not just Americans, but Afghanis and Poles and others involved in the Afghanistan War. This is what makes the motivation of the leakers so important to have full knowledge of: could they have safely redacted the names on the documents, and other identifying information? If they did, would this be any different than what governments would release and, therefore, the value of the leaked document would lose its substantial value? I think that the leakers could have redacted some names without the leak losing substantial value, but since leakers rarely know which names to redact and which not to, they choose to do no redacting whatsoever.

We can live in a world with Wikileaks, or we could live in a world without Wikileaks. Considering the technology available and the inability to control it, I don’t think we have a choice. Is the world without Wikileaks a better, safer world? I doubt it. Wikileaks functions somewhat like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as a government watchdog. Unfortunately, Wikileaks does not have a clear code of conduct like HRW and Amnesty, which makes this situation much more uncertain. We are better off with government watchdogs, but we are better off only when the code of conduct is clear.

In the end, I don’t have a straightforward position on it, mostly because the ethics of it are very complex. What I like about it is that we are forced to confront these issues, and think about the world in which we live, and leak.

]]> Comment on DefSec Gates Denounces Wikileaks Leak by Chip Mango http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366&cpage=1#comment-6123 Chip Mango Sun, 01 Aug 2010 18:33:52 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3366#comment-6123 Now that we know what the New York Times thinks of all this, what is your opinion on the ethics of the Wikileaks case? Cheers! Now that we know what the New York Times thinks of all this, what is your opinion on the ethics of the Wikileaks case?

Cheers!

]]> Comment on The War on Terror: Now Obama’s Problem, Down and Out of Control by Pat F. http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3359&cpage=1#comment-6122 Pat F. Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:04:12 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3359#comment-6122 This one: http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3359&cpage=1#comment-6117 :) This one:

http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3359&cpage=1#comment-6117

:)

]]> Comment on The War on Terror: Now Obama’s Problem, Down and Out of Control by Joshua http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3359&cpage=1#comment-6121 Joshua Wed, 28 Jul 2010 07:35:45 +0000 http://thewaterglass.net/?p=3359#comment-6121 Which assertion? Which assertion?

]]>