What is everyones opinion on this matter?
Here is an interview with WikiLeaks Editor In Chief Julian Assange
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenber...ulian-assange/
I for one support WikiLeaks and I view Julian Assange as a hero.
![TheHol[]yTape is offline](images/statusicon/user-offline.png)
Reputation: 26![TheHol[]yTape's Avatar](image.php?u=112823&dateline=1292709685 "TheHol[]yTape's Avatar")
WikiLeaks
What is everyones opinion on this matter?
Here is an interview with WikiLeaks Editor In Chief Julian Assange
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenber...ulian-assange/
I for one support WikiLeaks and I view Julian Assange as a hero.
Reputation: 14
I find the intentions behind transparency to be good, but the methods taken by WikiLeaks is flawed in and of itself. If it actually comes to be considered a valid source of "secret" information distribution, it becomes no better than any other source of news, in that it can be easily manipulated to further a single group's political agenda. For example, the recent publication of several middle eastern countries urging the U.S. to invade/prevent the nuclear program of Iran could be easily seen as a way to further destabilize possible relations within that area.
From a couple other articles on Assange, he seems to lead two separate standards. He says that he wants to bring out the truth, but at the same time, he's supposedly trying to protect the innocent. By releasing war documents related to a country that is actively at war, if anything he's endangering the lives of innocents as well as military personnel through his actions. If he were to intentionally hold back some of the files due to the destructive nature behind their release, he is then upholding censorship, which is the opposite of his reasons for creating the site in the first place.
Ultimately, I cannot support what he's currently doing, as his methods are too flawed. I have no idea what a flawless method could be, but if I were to hazard a guess, it would have to be a joint effort between a given government and the press, which will never occur due to the secretive nature of the government and the reckless nature of the press.
Reputation: 232
Apparently Interpol has a warrant for his arrest/extradition, for something involving the sexy times.
Reputation: 218
Honestly, I don't even know what WikiLeaks actually does.
Reputation: 268
I don't follow the site, but I'm all in favour of the people knowing more about what goes on.
Reputation: 677
Until the US gov starts denying it, it's pretty much proven that it's a deliberate leak.
There are just to damn many fascists in the US gov.
People are in danger... This is a terrorist act... The global community is under attack...
Of course more wars, more people murdered, more lies, more spying, destabilizing and torturing and people snatching and more fascism will make that go away.
Reputation: 13
Julian Assange is the man of the century.
Reputation: 10
My opinion =
Reputation: 245
I'm just a righteous boy in need of adventure
Reputation: 81
Now they say the director of WikiLeaks is being accused of **** etc.. Just to get him in jail because he tells the people the facts.. Is America changing into China or what?
Reputation: 292
People like Bill O' Reilly and Mike Huckabee think that those who leaked the documents should be put to death......it's scary to think some of these people are making decisions in America.
Sarah Palin compares them to terrorists and guilty of treason.
If America is hiding something corrupt then I want it leaked.
Of course it's in the government's best interest to keep things under wraps.
Letting people know of corruption within their own country is the opposite of treason.
Of course some information can actually be harmful to have leaked to the public not just to the government but to people living in that country, but some of it should be made public to the citizens.
There is a lot of corruption and money switching hands in America.
I laughed at the treason thing.
I have no allegiance to my country. Especially one where the government doesn't give a damn about its citizens.
If they started forcing people to join the military I would leave or find some excuse.
Reputation: 200
Alot of these politicians flipping shit because of it shouldve been held for treason years ago. It's ridiculous, Stephen Harper thinks Julian Assange should be assassinated and of course he's being framed for that ****. many almost fascists in our government. Why did our government create the documents in the first place anyway?
But I agree, this whole thing could've been done in a better way.
Reputation: 268
Stephen Harper is Canada's Prime Minister, in case if anyone didn't know. just fyi
Reputation: 116
This nit wit will most likely cause more harm than good with the release of these documents and personally I think he should be held for treason. While its great in theory for the truth to be out everywhere, most people are too stupid and paranoid to handle the reality of the world. Certain things need to be kept under wraps and when a person releases classified information like this it brings harm to the country they are from and in many cases could cost lives.
Reputation: 64
^ same, but after reading, it seems like it was illegal lol, leaking secret US files?Originally Posted by power_gamer_6
Reputation: 200
If hes gonna be held for treason, the rest of our government should share a cell with him.
Reputation: 93
Oh jeez, thanks for spoiling the game for me/sarcasm+wikipedia
Reputation: 57
Oh please we don't need to know about top secret missions or things that could put people in danger. This man has gone too far he's released information that could get people killed. I'm all for exposing corruption but not if it endangers lives.If you're in favor of the government controlling these leaks, please don't ***** and moan when everyone last one of your rights has become a privelage and they are free to bend you over and anally probe you at every stop because you're a suspected terrorist for not conforming to whatever arbitrary law they put into effect.
As a side note, a recent leak revealed the USA pressuring a Spanish judge and investigators to not investigate torture cases in guantanamo bay. But that's okay, it's better for us to not know they are COVERING UP TORTURE. I mean, thats certainly not been an issue. And entirely not what the USA cites as a huge reason we A) seceeded from BritainA reason we've continued wars C) A huge media bash on foreign governments. Seriously if you are standing up for the government breaking laws and ignoring rights to cover up their own shit then you are a fool. If you say because we are not intended to know, this is a ****ing government OF THE PEOPLE. What legitimate things could there be that aren't intended for us to know about? The one thing I can think of is ongoing operations and he hasn't released anything about that. He's released reports of past operations, messages of proposals for future ones, but nothing about current locations, memorandums or objectives.
What wikileaks has done is beyond the scope of what they have released. They have revealed far more than the content of these papers. What they have shown is how far our governments are truly willing to go to cover their own asses and maintain their veil. They have revealed true corruption.
Reputation: 123
He released info that we should have known.
Getting killed is a risk of being a soldier. They all knew the risks when they joined up.
Reputation: 265
Getting killed is a risk that police officers take, should we let people put officers' home addresses on the internet?
Reputation: 57
Their deaths should not be because of leaked information from Wikileaks. The protection of the people fighting in the war should come first. Not to mention this could also put innocent civilians in danger too. That's why IMO this information should not have been released. In some cases there's a valid reason to not release something. The fact that people feel the need to know EVERY LITTLE THING is IMO silly. Some things we are not ready for and in some cases don't need to know because it does us no harm or good.
Reputation: 677
Well, I have something to say on the supposed "deadly intel" that "enemies" could draw from wikileaks.
It's a pure fabrication.
No threat exists.
It's all propaganda and a sham.
People could be in danger; This is not tangible, this is what you get when a politician gets reminded by his staff to maintain deniability.
"We never said people are in danger, we said people COULD be in danger.
Of course there never was anyone in danger at all, that we know of, but as we did never investigate the matter at hand throughly, how could we possibly know, if there aren't people in danger right now."
It's the fun thing to do, because idiots who fall for it will be easily found in masses.
Reputation: 677
@hian:
If you look at the situation that Nixon faced, you can only say one thing; By todays standard, everything he did is completely legal.
If you look at the modern situation of the military involvements; They took years of years of preparation to deteriorate any chance of people standing up to the same issues that where under critique in Vietnam.
Now that idea, that the law is the highest form of judgement simply doesn't work.
We are talking about a government that runs concentration camps, where they confine dissident people they kidnap all over the world.
When I think back at watching the Abu Graib photos, there was one that will probably stay in my memory as the most prominent one:
The group posing next to the face of an afghan in a bodybag, that did happen to not make it through interrogation by CIA. They must have giving him a 10 hours beating and you could only see the face. By the look of the location you could see other bodybags and it seems to be that there where usually 3 to 4 bodies stored there for very short times (just in the open, no cooling) constantly.
That's to me a beating-to-death factory.
It's legal though, so we might as well contempt ourself with looking in another direction.
After all we weren't supposed to see any of that and it's such a pity that it had to come up in the trials. They could have just blacked the dude out and wrote "dead guy" there. It's not like it matters, how, or why the person they disrespected died, as long as nothing illegal happened, right?
After all the security risk is big of that making rounds; bad from a morale viewpoint and all that. Quite a number of People actually are factually bound to find themselves in danger, because of the effects.
Posting Permissions
