Another Wikileaks release

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'm glad he's being railroaded. Its obvious he has very few scrupples about what is being leaked. He's not the folk hero everyone makes him out to be.

Really?
If he was given any sort of fair shake and what he was doing was deemed illegal and he was shut down for it... fine. Some people may disagree... but fine - at least they played by the rules.

Labeling him as a terrorist without any sort of trial or hearing? Really? That's good?!
Obviously false/exaggerated charges being brought against him?
Companies breaking their normal rules and policies to try to silence him (possibly under their own free will or possibly under government pressure)?

This kind of crap seems good to you? These are exactly the types of reasons why people and organizations like him and wikileaks need to exist.

[User Name]

just found this too.. apparently his "rape" accusser his been linked to a cia operative.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/a...user-cia-ties/

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by User Name

just found this too.. apparently his "rape" accusser his been linked to a cia operative.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/a...user-cia-ties/

He's not wanted for questioning for "rape," but "rape by surprise."

Good lord.

[burn_this_city]

Fair shake?? He's encouraging illegal activity and providing a platform for spreading information obtained illegally. Not to mention the guy has absolutely no regard for what information is leaked, and how it might affect people implicated in it. I'm not talking about diplomataic gossip, how about the Afghan and Iraqi informants named in previous leaks? How about the list of sensitive sites that terrorists could attack to affect the ecomonmy. I guess we don't care about peoples lives in our quest for thruth. Why should legimitate businesses aid his endeavours? They open themselves to legal problems with the US. I also love the blackmail approach hes taken in recent days now that the heat is on. The guy doesnt care about the truth, hes trying to shame the US anyway he can. If you're going to engage in activities like this, you better be sure you're cleaner than preachers sheets, otherwise of course they're going to nail you anyways they can. Personally I feel bad for the idealist morons who leaked this information to him, who will now spend the rest of their lives in jail, while he parades around like a hero.

[HPLovecraft]

Damn those newspapers that provided the platform for the Pentagon Papers to be spread illegally! Damn newspapers in general for ever receiving illegal information! As a matter of fact, damn the New York Times, Der Spiegel, and the Guardian for hosting and providing platforms for the WikiLeaks docs, too! Bunch of rapists.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

Put in jail and denied bail because Sweden -- which hasn't even pressed any charges against him -- simply wants to ask him some "questions." In other words, keep him there, send him to Sweden, then send him to the US so freedom of speech can be made a further mockery of.

Democracy by dictatorship is right.

Oh well, Julian Assange isn't WikiLeaks, he's just the public face of it.

Freedom of speech should and can be restricted in certain circumstances.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

Really?
If he was given any sort of fair shake and what he was doing was deemed illegal and he was shut down for it... fine. Some people may disagree... but fine - at least they played by the rules.

Labeling him as a terrorist without any sort of trial or hearing? Really? That's good?!
Obviously false/exaggerated charges being brought against him?
Companies breaking their normal rules and policies to try to silence him (possibly under their own free will or possibly under government pressure)?

This kind of crap seems good to you? These are exactly the types of reasons why people and organizations like him and wikileaks need to exist.

It's important for you to know what people think of some foreign diplomat's nurse? Or about strategic informants in the middle east? His sole goal is to embarass the united states.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Freedom of speech should and can be restricted in certain circumstances.

Remind me where in the First Amendment it says freedom of speech should and can be restricted in certain circumstances as it applies to this.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

Damn those newspapers that provided the platform for the Pentagon Papers to be spread illegally! Damn newspapers in general for ever receiving illegal information! As a matter of fact, damn the New York Times, Der Spiegel, and the Guardian for hosting and providing platforms for the WikiLeaks docs, too! Bunch of rapists.

At least a newspaper has the sense to comb through the data and release appropriate information. Unless of course there was a 4000 page edition of the New York Times.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Fair shake?? He's encouraging illegal activity and providing a platform for spreading information obtained illegally. Not to mention the guy has absolutely no regard for what information is leaked, and how it might affect people implicated in it. I'm not talking about diplomataic gossip, how about the Afghan and Iraqi informants named in previous leaks? How about the list of sensitive sites that terrorists could attack to affect the ecomonmy. I guess we don't care about peoples lives in our quest for thruth. Why should legimitate businesses aid his endeavours? They open themselves to legal problems with the US. I also love the blackmail approach hes taken in recent days now that the heat is on. The guy doesnt care about the truth, hes trying to shame the US anyway he can. If you're going to engage in activities like this, you better be sure you're cleaner than preachers sheets, otherwise of course they're going to nail you anyways they can. Personally I feel bad for the idealist morons who leaked this information to him, who will now spend the rest of their lives in jail, while he parades around like a hero.

First: Nothing he's done in regards to these leaks has been found to be illegal in court.
Second: Furthermore, nobody has even charged him with anything in connection to the leaks.
Third: He made several efforts to work with the US state department to redact anything that put any individual informants in danger. On the Afgan war docs they actually worked with him and censored names and locations. Not enough? It's not entirely his fault. In this latest batch of releases the state dept. refused to work with him. Any redactions that should have been made but weren't are not his fault.

I'm leaving all the moral stuff out of it about whether or not he should be doing this and releasing everything he gets his hands on and if he's unfairly picking on the USA. That's a whole other can of worms.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

At least a newspaper has the sense to comb through the data and release appropriate information. Unless of course there was a 4000 page edition of the New York Times.

If you took the time to look over the WikiLeaks releases on their website, you will see many names and locations blocked out. It isn't all released willy-nilly. In fact, as Assange has stated, WikiLeaks worked with those newspapers I mentioned to blot out what they felt to be dangerous names and locations. WikiLeaks also went to the DoD and asked them to assist them in removing all names and locations that could be deemed dangerous, the normal practice when newspapers release leaked, classified info, but they refused. Besides that, Gibbs came out awhile ago and stated the Afghan/Iraq war docs were not that big a deal after all (they helped to edit some of those ones).

You can access a fairly wide-ranging cache of docs on the Guardian website itself.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

It's important for you to know what people think of some foreign diplomat's nurse? Or about strategic informants in the middle east? His sole goal is to embarass the united states.

Is everything he has released relevant and concerning to me? No.
The fact is, governments have been hiding a lot of very important information that, IMO, the public should be aware of. The press has been complacent and let them cover up, gloss over and get away with what is likely illegal activity in some cases.
An organization like this comes along, gets the information and decides that if nobody else will release anything then they'll have to release everything.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

If you took the time to look over the WikiLeaks releases on their website, you will see many names and locations blocked out. It isn't all released willy-nilly. In fact, as Assange has stated, WikiLeaks worked with those newspapers I mentioned to blot out what they felt to be dangerous names and locations. WikiLeaks also went to the DoD and asked them to assist them in removing all names and locations that could be deemed dangerous, the normal practice when newspapers release leaked, classified info, but they refused. Besides that, Gibbs came out awhile ago and stated the Afghan/Iraq war docs were not that big a deal after all (they helped to edit some of those ones).

You can access a fairly wide-ranging cache of docs on the Guardian website itself.

Judging by this article 100's of informants were outed. Including names, locations, ect.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_1...86-503543.html

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Judging by this article 100's of informants were outed. Including names, locations, ect.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_1...86-503543.html

Guess the US should have worked with him to remove that sensitive information, eh? Oops!

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

Guess the US should have worked with him to remove that sensitive information, eh? Oops!

Seriously? Maybe he should have taken the time to actual go through the information, rather than dump it on the interwebs for all to see. I find it hilarious the onus is on the US to filter the information being leaked.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Seriously? Maybe he should have taken the time to actual go through the information, rather than dump it on the interwebs for all to see. I find it hilarious the onus is on the US to filter the information being leaked.

...They did.

They then asked the US to go through and censor anything else that was extremely sensitive and was missed. What was released was that result. Either the names that got out there were not important, the US didn't care or they were left unchanged by the US on purpose for some other reason (i.e. give up a couple low level crappy informants to have people lash out against wikileaks? who knows...).

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Judging by this article 100's of informants were outed. Including names, locations, ect.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_1...86-503543.html

It's a massive archive, I have no doubt some names were revealed, and that wasn't what I was saying. My point was that an effort was made to detract the names and locations deemed "dangerous," the docs weren't just splattered all over the net without process. The State Department went over those docs with them. Gibbs has since come out and said it wasn't that big a deal and NOBODY has been hurt as a result of them -- which is strangely at odds with the constant screaming of the danger to national security.

One former intelligence official told the paper that the Taliban could launch revenge attacks on "traitors" in the coming days.

Yeah, no, that didn't happen.

I have to ask -- were you as equally flabbergasted as this when the Bush administration purposely blew the cover and revealed the identity of Valerie Plame?

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

I have to ask -- were you as equally flabbergasted as this when the Bush administration purposely blew the cover and revealed the identity of Valerie Plame?

Of course I was, they revealed her identity after her husbands critical story on the war. It was bullshat, and smacked of the typical republican freight train the opposition approach.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

At least a newspaper has the sense to comb through the data and release appropriate information. Unless of course there was a 4000 page edition of the New York Times.

Ah yes.

Too bad the NYT didn't comb through it themselves, but rather were in cooperation with the US government about what is ok and what isn't.

But I guess after the President has targeted a US citizen for death without any formal charges or a trial, none of the wikileaks stuff should be surprising.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

His sole goal is to embarass the united states.

Really now. Are you forgetting that prior to the War Logs & Dairy Wikileaks dumped Data regarding other States and Organizations including ldocs relating to:

Somali assassination orders
Daniel arap Moi family corruption
Bank Julius Baer
Scientology
BNP membership list
Bilderberg Group
Peru oil scandal
Nuclear accident in Iran
Kaupthing Bank
Love Parade planning

I fail to see how any of these are relevant if "His sole goal is to embarass the United States".

The International community would be better served to not attempt to destroy Wikileaks. Destroy it and all you'll get is is multitudes of other new organizations springing up to try and get it's "market share". Better to simply accept that Pandora's Box has been opened and simply establish a working relationship with it.