Or, at least, that’s what I assume she means when she asks “Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?”
Equating her recent book with the quarter-million or so cables among US embassies and the state department, she is known to have tweeted:
Inexplicable: I recently won in court to stop my book “America by Heart” from being leaked,but US Govt can’t stop Wikileaks’ treasonous act?
And imagine, we actually passed by an opportunity to have Sarah Palin in the White House!
Much more here.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
“Wikileaks’ treasonous act?” I wonder if she thinks just because you’re on the internet, you must be an American.
Oh. And it took me about 30 seconds to find several copies of her leak-proof book “America by Heart” on the interwebs. Her running for President would be the best present Obama could ever have.
Wikileaks is both treasonous and in need of “pursuing” like al Qaeda and the Taliban.
I think her domestic policy would be scary.
Well, the wikileaks guy would be trivial to catch and he won’t shoot back either – I guess that makes him a good substitute for Bin Laden and Al Qaida.
Our government’s probably been through much worse scandals in the diplomatic corps – I’m sure they’ll get over the wikileaks thing.
Um, because he hasn’t blowed anybody up?
And why does she want to pursue him with the same urgency normally reserved for mass murderers?
Because a) WikiLeaks can embarrass the US government, and b) he’s a “soft target”. Bullies much prefer soft targets. And hey, isn’t it easier to take out the guy pointing out what a bad job you’re doing than to actually do a good job?
My opinion on the whole mess is that the government is wrong to be focusing so obsessively on WikiLeaks. Do they go after newspapers the same way? No. They should be going after whoever leaked the information *to* WikiLeaks. Someone, somewhere has access to information, has sworn to protect it, and is violating that oath. If they’re serious, that’s who they need to go after. Since they’re instead focusing all their ire on Assange, it seems clear to me that they’re not all that interested in correcting the real problem.
Institutional incompetence. That’s what it is.
Calli, I don’t think Palin has undergone anything close to the sophisticated thinking your attributing to her! I think she is just snarking at Obama.
They should be going after whoever leaked the information *to* WikiLeaks.
My understanding is that this is in fact happening.
Palin displays her ignorance so often that it no longer surprises anyone. If we asked her to define “treason” we could expect her to yell “gotcha journalism”.
Truth is not treason.